Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України
For the first time, a complete inventory and analysis of the taxonomic composition of the flora of the phytogeographic plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine were conducted. The plot “Central Asia” was established in 1953 for the directed introduction...
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2022 |
|---|---|
| Автори: | , |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | Англійська |
| Опубліковано: |
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine
2022
|
| Онлайн доступ: | https://www.plantintroduction.org/index.php/pi/article/view/1616 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Plant Introduction |
| Завантажити файл: |  |
Репозитарії
Plant Introduction| _version_ | 1860145132309839872 |
|---|---|
| author | Shynder, Oleksandr Negrash, Julia |
| author_facet | Shynder, Oleksandr Negrash, Julia |
| author_sort | Shynder, Oleksandr |
| baseUrl_str | https://www.plantintroduction.org/index.php/pi/oai |
| collection | OJS |
| datestamp_date | 2023-08-26T20:38:45Z |
| description | For the first time, a complete inventory and analysis of the taxonomic composition of the flora of the phytogeographic plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine were conducted. The plot “Central Asia” was established in 1953 for the directed introduction and naturalization of plants from Central Asia. Over 1,000 plant species have been tested here during all this time, which indicates a large amount of experimental work. According to the inventory results, 308 valid taxa (species and subspecies) of higher vascular plants from 168 genera and 66 families have been recorded on the plot. Of these, 183 taxa belong to the natural flora of Central Asia. The structure of the flora on the study plot has certain features of the flora of Central Asia. However, in the conditions of Kyiv, the plants of Central Asian flora requiring more temperate habitats (e.g., plants originated from northern steppes, valley and lowland forests) have taken root best. The geographical structure of the flora of the plot is dominated by ergasiophytes with Central Asian (25.0 %), Eurasian and Paleoarctic (together 34.2 %), and sub-Mediterranean (10.9 %) types of ranges. From this number, 42 species of ergasiophytes are endemic to Central Asia. The biomorphological structure of the flora of the plot is dominated by perennials (47.3 %), and the share of woody plants is 26.4 %. According to Raunkiaer’s classification of life forms, hemicryptophytes (28.4 %), phanerophytes and cryptophytes (25.1 % each) predominate on the plot. In the conditions of Kyiv, phanerophytes from mountainous regions appeared to be the most resistant plants. While among ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin, plants growing in forests, steppes, shrubs, and edges appeared the most represented. Among the ergasiophytes growing on the plot “Central Asia”, 24 species are listed in the red books of Central Asian countries. Currently, there are some problems related to the state of phytocoenoses on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” and its flora in general (e.g., death of many ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin due to inconsistency of climatic conditions, expansion of invasive organisms, growing anthropogenic load, etc.) However, thanks to the large-scale introductory work, the collection of plants on the plot has a unique composition and remains one of the most attractive decorations of the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.46341/PI2022010 |
| first_indexed | 2025-07-17T12:54:09Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
Plant Introduction, 95/96, 3–43 (2022)
© The Authors. This content is provided under CC BY 4.0 license.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko
National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Oleksandr Shynder *, Julia Negrash
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Tymiryazevska str. 1, 01014 Kyiv, Ukraine;
* shinderoleksandr@gmail.com
Received: 15.05.2022 | Accepted: 06.07.2022 | Published online: 29.07.2022
Abstract
For the first time, a complete inventory and analysis of the taxonomic composition of the flora of the
phytogeographic plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of
Ukraine were conducted. The plot “Central Asia” was established in 1953 for the directed introduction
and naturalization of plants from Central Asia. Over 1,000 plant species have been tested here during all
this time, which indicates a large amount of experimental work. The structure of the flora on the study
plot has certain features of the flora of Central Asia. According to the inventory results, 308 valid taxa
(species and subspecies) of higher vascular plants from 168 genera and 66 families have been recorded
on the plot. Of these, 183 taxa belong to the natural flora of Central Asia. The structure of the flora of
plants on the study plot has certain features of the flora of Central Asia. However, in the conditions of
Kyiv, the plants of Central Asian flora requiring more temperate habitats (e.g., plants originated from
northern steppes, valley and lowland forests) have taken root best. The geographical structure of the flora
of the plot is dominated by ergasiophytes with Central Asian (25.0 %), Eurasian and Paleoarctic (together
34.2 %), and sub-Mediterranean (10.9 %) types of ranges. From this number, 42 species of ergasiophytes
are endemic to Central Asia. The biomorphological structure of the flora of the plot is dominated by
perennials (47.3 %), and the share of woody plants is 26.4 %. According to Raunkiaer’s classification of
life forms, hemicryptophytes (28.4 %), phanerophytes and cryptophytes (25.1 % each) predominate on
the plot. In the conditions of Kyiv, phanerophytes from mountainous regions appeared to be the most
resistant plants. While among ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin, plants growing in forests, steppes,
shrubs, and edges appeared the most represented. Among the ergasiophytes growing on the plot “Central
Asia”, 24 species are listed in the red books of Central Asian countries. Currently, there are some problems
related to the state of phytocoenoses on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” and its flora in general
(e.g., death of many ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin due to inconsistency of climatic conditions,
expansion of invasive organisms, growing anthropogenic load, etc.) However, thanks to the large-scale
introductory work, the collection of plants on the plot has a unique composition and remains one of the
most attractive decorations of the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden.
Keywords: introduction, native plants, flora structure, rare species, alien species
https://doi.org/10.46341/PI2022010
UDC 58.006 : 581.93 + 502.754 (477-25)
Authors’ contributions: Both authors set tasks, conducted field investigations and identified plant samples. Both authors wrote the
manuscript.
Funding: The work has been conducted within the following research program of the Department of Natural Flora Department
of the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 2020–2024 “Botanical and geographical
principles of protection of floristic diversity and the formation of the introduction populations of plants” (state registration number
0120U000174).
Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1146-0873
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3095-7538
4 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Introduction
One of the main tasks of the M.M. Gryshko
National Botanical Garden of the NAS of
Ukraine (NBG) in Kyiv was the reproduction
of landscapes and vegetation of various
regions of the temperate zone of Eurasia.
Currently, over 40 % of the territory of the
NBG is occupied by phytogeographical plots
with artificial phytocoenoses, i.e., “Steppes
of Ukraine”, “Carpathians”, “Forests of plain
Ukraine”, “Crimea”, “Caucasus”, “Altai and
Western Siberia”, “Far East”, and “Central Asia”.
Among the expositions, the phytogeographical
plots received principal attention and became
an important scientific and landscape part
of the NBG. Plants were introduced from the
respective regions and planted following
special protocols. The founder of the NBG,
member of the Academy of Sciences of UkrSSR,
prof. Mykola Gryshko also paid particular
attention to the phytogeographical plots.
Unlike other plantations, phytogeographical
plots are not simply representing certain plant
groups but emulate the native phytocoenoses
and entire ecosystems. In such plantations,
many rare plants, introduced from different
world regions, have successfully acclimatized
and formed local introductory populations
that are valuable objects requiring protection
(Kharkevych, 1972; Meshkova et al., 1990;
Bulakh & Didenko, 1999; Grytsenko, 2002;
Zaimenko et al., 2018).
The collection of the alien introduced
plants at the NBG needs constant monitoring
as a basis for the purposeful introduction of
plants and their acclimatization (Bulakh, 2010).
Information on the taxonomic composition
of ergasiophytes’ collections emphasizes the
importance and scope of research work in the
botanical gardens and dendrological parks.
At the NBG, an inventory of plants on the
collection plots is conducted every five years.
However, in some plantations, such as artificial
phytocoenoses of phytogeographical plots,
taxonomic inventory is a rather complicated
procedure because many occurring
ergasiophytes are not native to the flora of
Ukraine and are not listed in the standard
reference books and identification keys. Among
the phytogeographical plots of the NBG, the
recent inventory was conducted on the plot
“Caucasus” (Shynder, 2015; Didenko & Shynder,
2020) and some other plots, which significantly
clarified their taxonomic composition. So far,
information on the taxonomic composition of
plants on the phytogeographical plot “Central
Asia” has remained incomplete. Therefore, the
investigation aimed to conduct a complete
inventory of the taxonomic composition of
ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin on the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” of the
NBG, as well as all other species of flora, and
to explore their structure.
Material and methods
General methodology
The research was conducted in 2016–2021. To
determine plants, we used special reference
books on the taxonomic diversity of the flora
of Central Asia and adjacent regions (Pavlov,
1956–1966; Vvedenskiy, 1968–1987; Kamelin,
1993–2015; Ishmuratova et al., 2017) and some
special monographic works (Vvedenskiy, 1935;
Rusanov, 1949; Kononov & Moljkova, 1974;
Baum, 1978; Grudzinskaya, 1979; Tkachenko,
1986; Tzvelev, 1993). To identify live plants from
the plot, they were compared with original
specimens from the NBG herbarium (KWHA)
that were collected directly in Central Asia in
1950–1980. Inventory lists of planted plants,
taking into account their particular inaccuracy,
were also used as reference material (Sikura,
1970). The investigation used information
obtained earlier during the inventory
of the collection of living plants on the
phytogeographical plot “Caucasus” and wild
flora of the NBG (Shynder, 2015, 2019a, b, c).
Some plants from the plot were herbarized,
and their specimens were transferred to the
KWHA herbarium.
The nomenclature of taxa is given following
POWO (2022), with minor clarifications for
little-studied taxa according to GBIF (2022)
(Appendix A). The results of the research are
partially presented in the datasets “Biota of the
“Central Asia” plot in M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden” (https://www.inaturalist.
org/projects/biota-of-the-central-asia-plot-
in-m-m-gryshko-national-botanical-garden)
and “Flora of the M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden” (https://www.inaturalist.
org/pro jects/f lora-of-m-m-gr yshko-
national-botanical-garden).
To study the structure of the flora, some
basic classifications of plants were applied.
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/biota-of-the-central-asia-plot-in-m-m-gryshko-national-botanica
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/biota-of-the-central-asia-plot-in-m-m-gryshko-national-botanica
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/biota-of-the-central-asia-plot-in-m-m-gryshko-national-botanica
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/flora-of-m-m-gryshko-national-botanical-garden
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/flora-of-m-m-gryshko-national-botanical-garden
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/flora-of-m-m-gryshko-national-botanical-garden
Plant Introduction • 95/96 5
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
The following main groups were identified
by origin (Thellung, 1922; Pyšek et al., 2004).
(1) native plants – plants growing naturally
at the NBG, particularly on the plot “Central
Asia”. (2) ergasiophytes – alien plants that are
cultivated. (3) ergasiophygophytes – plants that
were previously specially introduced (mainly
to the NBG or to Ukraine, in general), and then
escaped beyond the places of cultivation and
became a spontaneous element of the flora.
(4) xenophytes – alien plants (usually weeds)
that have invaded the flora on their own.
Depending on the value of individual
plant species as a collection unit, we have
identified four groups of plants on the site.
(1) ergasiophytes – purposefully introduced
from Central Asia. These plants are the most
valuable because they are direct objects of
the introduction experiment. Plants from this
group represent a gene pool of the Central
Asian flora. (2) taxa, which occur in Central
Asia but were not specially introduced from
this region to the plot. These are native plants,
some xenophytes and ergasiophytes. Since
they formally make a part of the flora of Central
Asia, it is also advisable to include them in the
collection, but not to use them as a gene pool
of Central Asian origin. (3) native plants that are
not a part of the Central Asian flora. These are
background species forming the spontaneous
flora of the NBG. They grow successfully in
artificial phytocoenoses together with Central
Asian plants, filling certain ecological niches
but do not belong to the collection fund.
Although there are no strict rules to include
such plants in the inventory lists of the NBG,
many curators mentioned them in their
collection lists. (4) alien plants that are not a
part of the natural flora of Central Asia and
are not native plants of the NBG. This group
includes various xenophytes, ergasiophytes,
and ergasiophygophytes, including weeds and
invasive plant species.
Geographical analysis was carried out
following the principles of botanical-
geographical classification of plant ranges
(Walter & Straka, 1970; Kleopov, 1990). For
biomorphological analysis, the classification
of life forms of Clements (1920) with updates
(Sokolov & Svyazeva, 1965; Sikura, 1985;
Kuznetsov et al., 2013) and classification
of ecobiomorphs of Raunkiær (1934) were
applied. The classification of habitats follows
Baranovski et al. (2018). A complete list of
identified flora elements (life forms, range
types and habitats, etc.) is provided in
Appendix A.
Rusanov (1950) described two main methods
of directed introduction of plants: ‘genera
complexes’ and ‘geobotanical edificators’.
Later these methods were supplemented by
many other researchers (Sikura, 1985; Bulakh,
1994; Kokhno & Kurdyuk, 1994). Genera
complexes imply the creation of a collection
of a certain genus with the most whole
possible introduction of plants from different
global regions. For the “genera complexes”,
the availability of planting material is the
most important. The method of “geobotanical
edificators” implies the introduction of plants
that play the role of edificators in certain
groups and are the most promising for the
targeted introduction. It is hypothesized that
such plants are potentially more hardy and
stable in ex situ conditions (Rusanov, 1950).
The term “introductory population” was
initially applied in forestry (Logginov, 1980),
but is now widely used for research work
(Bulakh & Didenko, 1999; Grytsenko, 2002;
Shynder et al., 2014; Shumyk, 2016). The
peculiarity of “introductory populations” on
phytogeographical plots of the NBG is that
naturalized plants in artificial phytocoenoses
can reproduce and, therefore, acquire the
characteristics of natural populations (i.e.,
have complete age structure and homeostasis).
Such populations of ergasiophytes, in which
self-reproduction takes place, we called “full-
fledged introductory populations”. In other
cases, under “introductory populations” we
mean simple plantations.
Study area
The NBG is located in the central part of
Kyiv, on the hills of the high right bank of the
Dnipro River (Fig. 1). The plot “Central Asia”
is located in the western part of the NBG
and scattered on several slopes of different
exposures (mostly southwestern slopes),
between which there is a ravine. The soils of
the plot are dark gray, podzolic, on the loess.
A small area in the central lower part of the
plot consists of sands. Also, on several slopes,
there are small outcrops of loess. Initially, the
plot “Central Asia” has an area of ca. 3.5 ha. In
2021, its modern contour that is determined by
43 corner points (Appendix B) was established,
6 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Figure 1. Location of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” within the NBG outlines (A) and its sectional
subdivision (B). Sections: 1 – Kopetdag; 2 – vegetation of sands; 3 – floodplain forests (tugai); 4 – apple and
hawthorn forest; 5 – spruce forest; 6 – mountain meadows; 7 – deciduous forest.
Figure 2. The original project of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (Sikura, 1970). Sections:
1 – Kopetdag plant belts; 2 – vegetation of sands; 3 – walnut forest; 4 – floodplain forests (tugai); 5 – apple
and hawthorn forest; 6 – juniper forest; 7 – spruce forest; 8 – mountain meadows.
A
B
Plant Introduction • 95/96 7
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
and the area of the plot within the current
boundaries was recalculated for 3.14 ha.
The relief of the plot quite successfully
reproduces the main landscapes of Central
Asia, namely the forests and sparse forests of
the middle mountain belt and river valleys. The
main feature of the Central Asian mountain
systems is a well-defined zonation in the
location of plants. The general characteristics
of the vegetation of Central Asia were taken
into account when creating the plot (Fig. 2), so
it belongs to the type of “phytogeographical”
plots. The creation of phytogeographical
plots requires not only gathering the
collection of species of a certain region but
also the reproduction of phytocoenoses and
biosystems of this region. Phytogeographical
plots are rare in botanical gardens because
their creation is highly time-consuming and
expensive.
Ergasiophytes of the NBG originated
from Central Asia. This is the historical and
geographical region of Eurasia extending
from the Caspian Sea in the west to China and
Mongolia in the east (Fig. C1). Currently, Central
Asia is considered within the administrative
boundaries of five countries: Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and
Uzbekistan (The Editors of Encyclopaedia
Britannica, 2018). However, during the USSR
times, Kazakhstan was often not included in
Central Asia, or only its southern regions were
considered so (Kharkevych, 1972; Vvedenskiy,
1968–1987; Kamelin, 1993–2015). Therefore,
during the creation of the plot “Central Asia”,
the plants were introduced from Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan,
and only from the south-eastern part of
Kazakhstan (Sikura, 1985).
Central Asia is primarily a region of deserts
and semi-deserts. However, in its south, there
are located three major mountain systems:
Kopetdag, Pamir-Alai, and Tian Shan, which
have a characteristic vertical distribution of
vegetation. Other types of landscapes, such
as floodplain forests (tugai), are much less
common in Central Asia.
The climate of Central Asia is dry and
very continental. The northern part of this
geographical region (including the Tian Shan)
belongs to the temperate climate zone, and
the southern part (in particular, Kopetdag and
Pamir-Alai) – to the subtropical climate zone
(The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica,
2018). In 1968, only ca. 8,000 species were
estimated. However, according to the latest
data, the flora of Central Asia includes 9,341
species from 1,300 genera and 161 families
(Vvedenskiy, 1968–1987; Kamelin, 1993–2015).
The climatic temperate-continental
conditions of Kyiv are very different from the
typical arid and continental climate of Central
Asia. Many plants of the Central Asian flora
simply cannot take root in Kyiv or become
short-lived. Therefore, one of the tasks of the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” was to
test the stability of plants from the flora of
the Central Asian region. In the last decade,
due to global warming, the climate of the
central regions of Ukraine changed toward
aridification (Osadchy et al., 2010; Boychenko
et al., 2016) and became more suitable for
ergasiophytes from warm regions of Central
Asia.
Historical overview
Formally, the NBG was founded in 1935. But
at that time, in the territory allocated for
creating the botanical garden, there were
two settlements in the suburbs of Kyiv, with
a population of about 2,000 inhabitants.
Therefore, preparatory and design work
lasted for many years, was interrupted in 1941–
1944 by WWII, and continued after the war
(Chuvikina, 2016). According to the project of
first curators M.M. Prakhov and I.V. Trotsenko,
the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”
was founded in 1953. At that time, many
artificially planted trees and shrubs were
growing on the plot, combining native species
and ergasiophytes of American and Western
European origin. Some of them were kept
during the creation of the plot, and these alien
plants still grow on this territory.
The main planting material was collected
during expeditions to the Central Asian
republics of the former USSR (Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and
Uzbekistan). These expeditions were organized
by the curators of the phytogeographical
plot “Central Asia”: M.M. Prakhov (1953, 1954),
I.V. Trotsenko (1955–1958), J.J. Sikura (1961–1962,
1965, 1973, 1982) and P.Y. Bulakh (1982–1983)
(Kharkevych, 1972; Sikura, 1975, 1982; Bulakh,
1994). As a result of expeditions, ca. 1,000
species from 312 genera and 67 families of
Central Asian flora were introduced to the
8 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
plot (Sikura, 1982, 1985). This accentuates the
large scale of this introductory experiment.
Ergasiophytes were planted according to the
general plan in different plot sections, which
simulated individual phytocoenoses and plant
belts of the Central Asian region. During the
first 20 years, the main phytocoenoses, which
proved to be stable in the conditions of Kyiv,
were finally established (Fig. 2) (Sikura, 1970).
Since then, individual plantations have been
adjusted, and new plants have been planted.
According to the 1969 inventory, only 241
ergasiophytes from 87 genera and 40 families
grew on the plot “Central Asia” (Kharkevych,
1972). However, in 1982, the collection of the
plot “Central Asia” already comprised 621 plant
species, 414 of which were recommended for
a more comprehensive introduction (Sikura,
1982). As of 1985, 1,029 collection specimens
of Central Asian plants were introduced and
studied (Sikura, 1985).
Ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin have
been the subject of special attention at the
NBG. The most valuable and resilient plants
have been transplanted to other plots of
the NBG or transferred to other scientific
institutions for further introduction and
acclimatization. In the 1950s, M.M. Prakhov
studied some species of the genera Eremurus
M. Bieb. and Tulipa L. in the plantations of
the “Central Asia” plot (Kharkevych, 1972).
In the 1960s and 1980s, J.J. Sikura conducted
comprehensive acclimatization observations
on many ergasiophytes in the primary culture
and their natural environment (Zemkova &
Sikura, 1980; Sikura, 1982, 1985; Shisha et al.,
2008). In particular, Sikura transplanted 353
endemic taxa to the NBG (Sikura, 1985). In 1989–
2010, P.Y. Bulakh conducted a comprehensive
study of Allium L. species on the plot and in
nature (Bulakh, 1994, 2010; Bulakh & Popil,
2010). On the example of introductory
populations of ergasiophytes from Central Asia
and the Caucasus, together with S.Y. Didenko
he described the phenomenon of plant quasi-
senility (Bulakh & Didenko, 1999).
The acclimatization of different species
from Central Asia at the NBG was often
unsuccessful due to inconsistent climatic
conditions. Many sown or planted plants did
not take root or were damaged during severe
winters. Some successfully acclimatized
ergasiophytes did not withstand competition
and were displaced from the plantations by
more invasively active alien plants. In the last
30 years, several artificial phytocoenoses
(mountain meadows, pistachio woodland)
have fallen into disrepair and disappeared.
The number of thermophilic plants that did
not survive severe winters in 1970–2010. Some
50–60-year-old tree plantations have reached
the climax and begun to dry up. Recently,
many alien (including invasive) plant species
have become widespread. All these negative
factors determine the need for reconstructing
artificial phytocoenoses of the plot “Central
Asia” and a comprehensive inventory of its
vegetation.
At the same time, some sections and
artificial phytocoenoses on the “Central Asia”
plot are successfully preserved to our days,
i.e., Kopetdag plant belts, including juniper
forest, high-grass meadows and Kopetdag
shibljak (Fig. 3 A, C), tamarisk plantings in
sands (Fig. 3 E, F), tugai (Fig. 3 D), apple-
hawthorn forest, spruce forest (Fig. 3 B), and
some other. These plantations now define
the overall appearance of the plot but
also require maintenance and enrichment
measures. Thanks to the successful planning
of plantations during their creation, the
artificial phytocoenoses that remained in the
plantations of the plot “Central Asia” even
today well reproduce the zonal location of
plant belts in the mountainous regions of
Central Asia (Meshkova et al., 1990).
The low-lying areas of the plot represent
the vegetation of desert shrub phytocoenoses
(where several species of tamarisk are
represented) and the vegetation of tugai
(where the stand is formed by Populus L.,
Salix L., and Ulmus L. species).
On the eastern slope of the plot, mountain
belts of apple-hawthorn and walnut forests
gather species from Acer L., Crataegus L.,
Juglans L., Malus Mill., and Prunus L. genera,
and a coniferous belt with Picea schrenkiana
Fisch. & C.A. Mey. is modeled. At the top of
this slope, it was planned to create a belt of
juniper shrubs with Juniperus sabina L. and
mountain meadows, but most of the planted
here ergasiophytes appeared unstable.
The Kopetdag vegetation is quite diverse in
the western part of the plot. Here are located
juniper forests formed by Juniperus excelsa
M. Bieb. subsp. polycarpos (С. Koch) Takht.,
and J. sabina. Here is also mountain vegetation
of crooked forest formed by Celtis caucasica
Plant Introduction • 95/96 9
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
A
C
E
G
B
D
F
H
Figure 3. Artificial phytocoenoses of the “Central Asia” plot: A – juniper slope of Kopetdag plantations;
B – fragment with Juniperus seravschanica; C – Ephedra equisetina in Kopetdag plantations; D – spruce belt
with Picea schrenkiana; E – Allium christophii and Eremurus fuscus in the tall-grass meadow of Kopetdag
plantations; F – Arum korolkowii in tugai; G, H – alley and tamarisk plantations.
10 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Willd., Cornus sanguinea L. subsp. australis
(C.A. Mey.) Jáv., Ephedra equisetina Bunge,
Lonicera tatarica L., Rosa spinosissima L.,
Prunus sogdiana Vassilcz., Crategus spp., etc.
Open sites at the top of the slope are
occupied by tall-grass mountain meadows
with Allium, Eremurus, and Rumex L. species
participation.
At Kopetdag and in the tugai vegetation,
various geophytes, which formed quite stable
introductory populations, are represented.
Among them are Arum korolkowii Regel,
Fritillaria sewerzowii Regel, Eremurus fuscus
(O. Fedtsch.) Vved., and some species of Allium,
Tulipa, and Muscari genera. Most of these
species are highly decorative.
Results and discussion
Taxonomic diversity and structure of flora
According to the study results, 308 valid taxa
of higher vascular plants from 168 genera of
66 families have been recorded within the plot
“Central Asia” (Table 1). Within this number,
only 70 taxa have Central Asian origin. For
113 plant taxa, the introduction from Central
Asia has not been confirmed despite their
natural ranges cover this region. Therefore,
we include in the collection fund of the flora of
Central Asia 183 taxa that grow in plantations
on the plot “Central Asia”. Other 42 taxa of
native plants and 80 taxa of alien plants were
identified on the plot. These 122 taxa were not
listed in the collection fund of “Central Asia”
plot. Nevertheless, we included them in the
analysis because these taxa are also an integral
part of the plot ecosystems.
During the inventory of the flora of the
plot “Central Asia”, a lot of work was done
to determine taxa of some difficult genera
complexes (i.e., Acer, Allium, Crataegus,
Tamarix, and Tulipa) (Negrash & Shynder,
2021). The existing inventory lists of these
taxa were often inaccurate with many
errors, and due to the disappearance
of many plants, these records required
verification. The obtained information
is of great importance for clarifying the
collection composition of living plants of
the NBG (Shynder, 2019a, b, c).
Compared to other phytogeographical plots
of the NBG, the Central Asian flora has an
average level of species richness. For example,
350 taxa from 406 totally grown in the plot
“Caucasus” are part of the collection fund.
In all territories of the plot “Forests of the
plain part of Ukraine”, 307 species are listed
in the collection fund. 183 species from the
plot “Carpathians” and 249 species from the
plot “Crimea” are included in the respective
collection funds. In the plot “Altai and Western
Siberia”, 90 species are introduced from
the Altai. In the plot “Far East” 130 species
belong to the collection fund (Shynder, 2015;
Didenko & Shynder, 2020). However, climatic
conditions of Central Asia are also the most
different from the conditions of the city of
Kyiv, which also explains its relatively low
representativeness. Today, the plot “Central
Asia” has an average level of diversity in the
collection flora. Therefore, it is advisable to
Higher taxa
Central Asian flora
(collection fund)
Native
flora
Alien flora
Total
Plants introduced
from Central Asia
Other
categories
Plants introduced
but not from
Central Asia
Xenophytes Escaped
plants
Gymnosperms 4 2 1 7
Pinopsida 3 2 1 6
Gnetopsida 1 1
Angiosperms 66 113 43 18 18 43 301
Monocots 24 18 7 4 2 10 65
Eudicots 42 95 36 16 16 31 233
Total 70 113 43 22 18 42 308
Table 1. The general structure of the flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (number of species
and infraspecific taxa).
Plant Introduction • 95/96 11
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
continue the purposeful introduction of new
plants.
Among the leading families of the flora
of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”
(Table 2), almost the same systematic groups
are represented as in the native flora of
Central Asia with some deviations only. For
example, in the native flora of Central Asia,
the leading families are: Asteraceae (18.2 %
of the total number of species in the flora),
Fabaceae (13.4 %), Lamiaceae (6.0 %), Poaceae
(5.8 %), Apiaceae (5.1 %), Brassicaceae (4.7 %),
Liliaceae (4.3 %), Chenopodiaceae (3.7 %)
(Malyshev, 1972). Large areas of Central Asia
are covered with dry steppes, deserts, and
salt marshes. The plants adapted to such
habitats comprise the main part of the flora
in Central Asia. However, only Central Asian
plants that require more temperate habitats
(northern steppes, lowland forests, etc.) root
well in the conditions of Kyiv. Several decades
of acclimatization experiments showed that
many desert and steppe plants from Central
Asia (e.g., certain representatives of Fabaceae,
Lamiaceae, Apiaceae, Chenopodiaceae, etc.)
could also be successfully grown in the NBG
(Kharkevych, 1972; Sikura, 1982) but their
introduction requires unreasonably high
expenses. Moreover, due to inconsistencies
and lack of consorts, many such plants lose
the ability to reproduce. Therefore, it is
advisable to continue the introduction into
artificial phytocoenoses of the plot only plant
species from the temperate-continental areas
of Central Asia.
The participation of species with different
types of geographical ranges is an important
indicator of any flora (Walter & Straka, 1970;
Didukh, 2007). We analyzed the geographical
features of all plants that were found during
the inventory of the plot “Central Asia”
(Table 3). Notably, among ergasiophytes
introduced from Central Asia to the plot,
the majority (59.2 %) have the Central Asian
type of distribution. Among these plants are
many narrow endemics (e.g., Cotoneaster
neoantoninae A.N. Vassiljeva, Crataegus
dsungarica Zabel ex Lange, Fritillaria
sewerzowii Regel, Malus sieversii (Ledeb.)
Roem. var. kirghisorum (Al. Fed. & Fed.)
Ponomar., Puschkinia hyacinthoides Baker).
These plants are the most valuable and are of
great importance among other collections of
plants of the NBG.
Family
Number of species and
infraspecific taxa
Entire flora Collection fund
Rosaceae 34 26
Asteraceae 21 10
Poaceae 16 15
Amaryllidaceae 15 12
Liliaceae 14 10
Fabaceae 12 8
Asparagaceae 10 2
Polygonaceae 10 10
Table 2. Leading families of the flora of the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”.
In the flora of Central Asia, there are taxa
with different types of ranges, but most of
them have Central Asian, sub-Mediterranean,
and broad Eurasian ranges. In addition, native
and alien species of plants grow on the plot,
among which various types of ranges are
represented. Considering the total number of
taxa on the plot, plants with the Central Asian
type of range make up 25.0 % of the collection
fund but represent only 15.1 % of the entire
Central Asian flora. Apparently, this share is
currently low due to the constant extinction of
poorly acclimatized Central Asian plants. This
indicator should be increased, and the most
perspective plants for a new introduction are
endemic taxa of Central Asia.
We have identified the natural habitats
of ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin
(Appendix A). Among them, on the plot there
is currently the largest number of plants that
were transplanted from the mountainous
regions of Central Asia (primarily the Kopetdag
and Western Tian Shan). Plants from the lower
and middle mountain belts turned out to be
the most successful in their introduction to
Kyiv’s climatic conditions. This partly confirms
the importance of applying the method of
climatic analogs during the scientifically
directed introduction of plants.
The biomorphological structure of the flora
reflects its formation in accordance with the
regional ecological and climatic conditions
of the environment. The distribution of life
forms in the sharply continental conditions
of Central Asia is very peculiar. In the 1960s,
about 1,330 woody plant species (near 17 % of
12 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
the total flora) were identified for the flora
of Central Asia (Sokolov & Svyazeva, 1965).
This share of woody plants is much higher
than in the native floras of temperate regions
of Europe, where it is within a range of 10–
13 % (Novosad, 2005–2007; Lukash, 2009;
Moisienko, 2011; Kolomiychuk, 2020). The
flora of Central Asia is significantly dominated
by shrubs (about 41.1 %) and subshrubs
(about 30.4 %), but few trees (about 17.6 %),
small shrubs (about 10.0 %), and lianas (<1 %)
are represented here (Sokolov & Svyazeva,
1965). Such a combination of different types
of woody plants, with a high proportion
of shrubs, is a peculiarity of Central Asian
vegetation. The uniqueness of this flora
is emphasized by its high endemism. For
example, 60.2 % of woody plants are endemic,
which is probably the highest rate among the
temperate zones of the Holarctic.
Biomorphological structure of the flora
of the plot “Central Asia” (Table 4) also has a
high proportion of woody plants, but trees
predominate significantly over shrubs. The
vegetation cover of the Forest-Steppe and
other temperate regions of Europe has a
similar structure (Shynder, 2019a, b, c; Lukash,
2009). It should be noted that almost all
biomorphs were transplanted here in the first
years of the creation of plantations of the plot
“Central Asia”. For example, according to Sikura
(1985), in the first 30 years on the plot “Central
Asia” acclimatization was successful in 88 %
of taxa of woody plants, 71.5 % of shrubs, 50 %
of subshrubs, 82 % of perennials, and 98 %
of annuals. However, the current inventory
Type of the
geographic range
Entire flora Collection fund Ergasiophytes from Central
Asia
number of taxa % number of taxa % number of taxa %
American 22 7.5 - - - -
Asian (excluding
Central Asian)
18 5.5 7 4.3 2 4.2
Central Asian 46 14.9 46 25 42 59.2
Sub-Mediterranean
– Central Asian
9 2.9 9 4.9 2 2.8
Boreal 1 0.3 - - - -
Caucasian 6 1.9 - - - -
Cosmopolitan 4 1.3 4 2.2 - -
Cultigenic origin 7 2.3 1 0.5 - -
European 20 6.5 1 0.5 - -
Euro-Caucasian 6 1.9 2 1.1 - -
Euro-sub-
Mediterranean
36 11.7 15 8.2 4 5.6
Eurasian 45 14.6 39 21.2 9 12.7
Eurasian desert 3 1.0 3 1.6 3 4.2
Eurasian forest-
steppe
2 0.6 2 1.1 - -
Eurasian steppe 6 1.9 3 1.6 2 2.8
Far Eastern 2 0.6 - - - -
Holarctical 7 2.3 7 3.8 1 1.4
Sub-Mediterranean 42 13.6 20 10.9 4 5.6
Paleoarctical 26 8.4 24 13.0 1 1.4
Total 305 100.0 183 100.0 70 100.0
Table 3. Geographical structure of the flora on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (distribution of
species and infraspecific taxa).
Plant Introduction • 95/96 13
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
Life forms
(vegetation forms)
Entire flora Collection fund Ergasiophytes from Central Asia
number of
taxa % number of
taxa % number of
taxa %
Trees 52 16.9 30 16.3 25 35.2
Shrubs 30 9.7 14 7.6 11 15.5
Subshrubs 7 2.3 4 2.2 3 4.2
Lianas 6 1.9 - - - -
Perennials 137 44.5 86 47.3 31 45.1
Biennials 19 6.2 12 6.5 - -
Annuals 57 18.5 37 20.1 - -
Total 308 100.0 183 100.0 70 100.0
Table 4. Biomorphological structure of flora on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (distribution of
species and infraspecific taxa) according to Clements (1920) and Kuznetsov et al. (2013).
shows that in the phytocoenoses of the NBG,
trees and perennial herbaceous ergasiophytes
of Central Asian origin were capable for long-
term growth and formation of self-sustaining
populations. Annuals were not able to form
long-lived populations without artificial
seeding.
The distribution of ergasiophytes on the
plot “Central Asia” according to Raunkiaer’s
(1934) classification is similar (Table 5). The
share of phanerophytes is high. Among
ergasiophytes transplanted from Central Asia,
more than half are phanerophytes. Thus, in
Kyiv conditions, phanerophytes from Central
Asia mountainous regions proved to be the
most stable.
In our opinion, to improve the native
structure of the flora of the plot “Central
Asia”, the directed introduction of shrubs
is required. Perennials are another
biomorphological group that is most
promising for increase. At the same time,
the trees occupy pretty large areas on the
plot, so the introduction of new trees here
is not justified from a scientific point of
view. It should be noted that among the
ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin, there
are no annuals (therophytes) and not a single
liana from the flora of Central Asia left on the
plot. Since annuals occupy a prominent place
in the native flora of Central Asia, at least a
few resistant species with decorative qualities
are promising for the targeted introduction.
At the same time, the life form of tree lianas is
not typical for Central Asia, and there are only
a few such species of Atragene and Clematis
(Sokolov & Svyazeva, 1965). Given that these
plants (e.g., Clematis orientalis L.) are highly
ornamental and their introduction is well
appropriated.
Life forms
(ecobiomorphs)
Entire flora Collection fund Ergasiophytes from Central Asia
number of
taxa
% number of
taxa
% number of
taxa
%
Phanerophytes 93 30.2 46 25.1 37 52.9
Chamaephytes 5 1.6 4 2.2 2 2.9
Hemicryptophytes 81 26.3 52 28.4 6 8.6
Cryptophytes 79 25.6 46 25.1 25 35.7
Therophytes 50 16.2 35 19.1 - -
Total 308 100.0 183 100.0 70 100.0
Table 5. Biomorphological structure of flora on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (distribution of
species and infraspecific taxa) according to Raunkiaer (1934).
14 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
The distribution of plants on the plot
“Central Asia” by habitat type (Table 6) in
general is quite typical for the ecosystems
of the NBG. Among ergasiophytes of Central
Asian origin, the most represented are
plants of forests, steppes, shrubs, and edges.
However, typical Central Asian plants growing
in a variety of clay, sandy and stony semi-
deserts and deserts, saline habitats, and alpine
meadows are undoubtedly unstable in the
NBG. In the future, in the phytogeographical
plot “Central Asia”, the use of the method of
geobotanical edificators (Rusanov, 1950) is
promising. That is, the directed introduction
of a small number of ergasiophytes, which
dominate in the extreme habitats of Central
Asia, is promising. Nevertheless, the edificators
themselves (e.g., Ammodendron bifolium (Pall.)
Yakovlev, Artemisia spp., Ferula spp., Haloxylon
ammodendron (C.A. Mey.) Bunge ex Fenzl,
Leymus racemosus (Lam.) Tzvelev, Prangos
pabularia Lindl., Saccharum spontaneum L.,
and Salvia spp.) can be quite resistant and
affordable for cultivation.
Genera complexes
The genera complexes of ergasiophytes,
represented only on some plots, including
the collection of plants from the plot “Central
Asia” are valuable heritage of the NBG (Sikura,
1985; Kokhno & Kurdyuk, 1994). To date, only
a small number of taxa from those introduced
during the Soviet era have remained in the
NBG plantations. Thus, in the 1960–1980’s, 19
Crataegus species and 24 Eremurus species
grew on the plot “Central Asia” (Sikura, 1969;
Ostashevsky, 1988). During this period, 56
species of the genus Allium were tested, most
of which were successfully rooted (Bulakh,
1994). Similar diversity was observed in
ergasiophytes from other genera. However,
the number of ergasiophytes on the plot has
decreased significantly, so only a few genera
complexes with four or more ergasiophytes
are represented here today (Appendix A).
Native and alien taxa for Central Asian flora
are not considered.
The genus Acer is represented on the plot
by four ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin:
A. monspessulanum L. subsp. turcomanicum
(Pojark.) A.E. Murray, A. pentapomicum Stewart
ex Brand, A. platanoides L. subsp. turkestanicum
(Pax) P.C. de Jong and A. tataricum L. subsp.
semenovii (Regel & Herder) A.E. Murray, and
three species of different origin. Species of the
genus Acer play the role of assectators, and the
alien A. negundo L. and native A. platanoides
subsp. platanoides significantly litter the
plantations.
The genus Allium is the largest represented
in the flora of the plot. Currently, there are 12
ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin and one
alien invasive species, A. tuberosum Rottler ex
Spreng. (Fig. C2). Most species of the genus
are ornamental plants. Especially effective
are their groups, such as A. altissimum
Regel, A. caeruleum Pall., A. nutans L.,
Life forms
(vegetation-forms)
Entire flora Collection fund Ergasiophytes from Central Asia
number of
taxa
% number of
taxa
% number of
taxa
%
Clay 2 0.6 2 1.1 1 1.4
Forests 75 24.4 38 20.7 17 23.9
Shrubs and edges 67 21.8 47 25.5 26 36.6
Meadows 46 14.9 25 13.6 8 11.3
Sands 3 1.0 3 1.6 - -
Steppes 28 9.1 21 12.0 14 21.1
Stony 2 0.6 2 1.1 2 2.8
Synanthropic 84 27.3 44 23.9 2 2.8
Wetlands 1 0.3 1 0.5 - -
Total 308 100.0 183 100.0 70 100.0
Table 6. Ecological and coenotic structure of the flora on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”
(distribution of species and infraspecific taxa).
Plant Introduction • 95/96 15
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
A. rosenbachianum Regel. The use of these
plants as ornamental crops in Ukraine began
with the mass introduction of species of the
genus Allium to the plot “Central Asia” (Sikura,
1970; Bulakh, 1994). The possibility of expanding
the collection of Allium species from Central
Asian flora is very large. There are almost 200
species of Allium in the native flora of Central
Asia. Many of them are promising ornamental
plants. Some Allium species are used as
vegetable crops. Their targeted introduction is
now one of the ways to improve the flora of
the plot. It should be noted that Allium species
in Kyiv conditions can naturalize and in the
artificial phytocoenoses can form full-fledged
introductory populations.
The genus Crataegus is represented on
the plot by many species, among which five
Central Asian ergasiophytes and four taxa
of other origin have been identified so far
(Fig. C3). This genus is a diverse taxonomic
group challenging to identify. Hawthorns are
wild fruit plants, but in the collection, only
C. dsungarica has medium-sized fruits and is
of great practical value. On the plot, hawthorns
grow mainly in the sections of hawthorn-apple
forest, Kopetdag, and sand vegetation and play
a significant role in artificial phytocoenoses.
After the general inventory, it is important
to continue to study the taxonomic diversity
of the genus Crataegus on the plot to restore
information about previously introduced
species. In the future, new species may be
identified in the plantations of the plot,
because in the Soviet era, 19 species were
introduced here (Ostashevsky, 1988).
The genus Tamarix is represented by
five specimens, which we have currently
identified as four species: T. aralensis Bunge,
T. hohenackeri Bunge, T. ramosissima Leber.
(there are two forms or hybrids of this
species), and T. szovitsiana Bunge (Fig. C4).
These plants represent the vegetation of
sands. Tamarix szovitsiana is the earliest
flowering and is highly decorative. Another
species, T. hohenackeri is also highly
decorative but blooms later. Other tamarisks
are represented by less decorative forms.
In general, the experience of growing these
beautiful plants confirms their versatile value
and stability in culture (Rusanov, 1944). Given
the high attractiveness of T. hohenackeri and
T. szovitsiana in the the plot plantations, the
cultivation of new ornamental species of
the genus Tamarix of Central Asian flora is
promising.
The genus Tulipa in the collection includes
seven ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin,
as well as T. sprengeri Baker from Asia Minor
(Fig. C5). Tulips are among the most ornamental
plants on the plot “Central Asia”, although
their introductory populations are small and
often hidden in the depths of plantations.
In most cases, introduced tulips reproduce
vegetatively and form clones ranging in size
from several shoots (T. undulatifolia Boiss.
var. micheliana (Hoog) Wilford) to many
square meters (T. kaufmanniana Regel and
T. praestans H.B. May). The value of tulips in
artificial phytocoenoses of the studied plot
is extremely high, because the world center
of biodiversity of this genus is represented
in Central Asia. In Soviet times, many species
of tulips were introduced to the plot, but the
exact number is unknown. However, a small
part of them remains to date. Therefore,
the targeted introduction of new species
of Central Asian tulips and the creation
of their introductory populations on the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” is one of
the most important tasks.
Rare species
Among the main tasks of the phytogeographical
plots is the conservation of rare plants. Among
the ergasiophytes that grow in plantations
on phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”,
there are two species of the IUCN Red List
(IUCN, 2022) with critical categories of a
rarity – Malus niedzwetzkyana Dieck and
M. sieversii. Besides this, there are 24 rare
plants listed in different red books of Central
Asian countries. In particular, the Red Book of
Kazakhstan (Baitulin, 2014) includes Juniperus
seravschanica, Picea schrenkiana, Allium
aflatunense B. Fedtsch, Tulipa kaufmanniana,
T. suaveolens Roth, T. undulatifolia Boiss. var.
micheliana (Hoog) Wilford, T. urumiensis Stapf,
Arum korolkowii Regel, Celtis caucasica Hohen.
ex Planch., Lonicera tatarica L., L. tatarica
var. micrantha Trautv., Silene coronaria (L.)
Clairv., Fraxinus sogdiana Bunge, Crataegus
ambigua C.A. Mey. ex A.K. Becker, Malus
niedzwetzkyana, M. sieversii, M. sieversii var.
kirghisorum, and Prunus armeniaca L. The
Red Book of Uzbekistan (Khassanov, 2016)
includes Allium aflatunense, Eremurus fuscus,
16 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Tulipa bifloriformis Vved., T. kaufmanniana,
and T. undulatifolia var. micheliana. The
Red Book of Tajikistan (Rahimi et al., 2017)
includes Allium rosenbachianum, A. stipitatum,
T. bifloriformis, T. kaufmanniana, T. praestans,
and T. undulatifolia var. micheliana. The Red
Book of Turkmenistan (Annabayramov, 2011)
includes Juglans regia L., Malus sieversii, and
M. sieversii var. kirghisorum. The Red Book
of Kyrgyzstan (Shukurov, 2006) includes
M. niedzwetzkyana, M. sieversii, M. sieversii
var. kirghisorum, and Tulipa kaufmanniana.
In general, ergasiophytes in the plot “Central
Asia” are of great sozological importance.
Many rare plants on the plot are represented
in the form of introductory and full-fledged
introductory populations. Their survey will be
the subject of a separate study.
Phytocoenoses and ecosystems
The vegetation on the plot “Central Asia” is now
heterogeneous and generally corresponds to
the initial plans (Sikura, 1970). However, due to
the relatively small number of ergasiophytes of
Central Asian origin, artificial phytocoenoses
are not formed and mostly do not have a
complete natural coenotic structure. Creating
the plot, its first curators realized that it is
impossible to reproduce the full vegetation
of the plains and mountains of Central Asia in
Kyiv. Therefore, it was important to create a
layer of edificators of a certain phytocoenosis,
plant a shrub layer (if possible), and a large
number of geophytes and other assectators
(Sikura, 1970).
The plant belts of the Kopetdag are most
fully represented on the phytogeographical
plot “Central Asia”. Sections of “Kopetdag”
occupy the entire western part of the plot
and are distributed on the principle of vertical
zonation of the mountains (Figs. 2 & 3). Among
the edificators in artificial phytocoenoses,
the following trees of mountain forests
are represented here: Crataegus spp.,
Celtis caucasica, Elaeagnus angustifolia L.,
Prunus armeniaca, P. cerasifera Ehrh.,
P. mahaleb L., P. sogdiana, and Juglans regia.
They are complemented by shrubs Caragana
halodendron (Pall.) Dum. Cours., Cotoneaster
neoantoninae, Ephedra equisetina, Lonicera
tatarica, and Rosa spinosissima. On the
southern slope of this section, juniper (archa)
shrublands with Juniperus seravschanica are
formed, and the eastern slope is covered by
the monodominant group of J. sabina (Fig.
3 A). In some meadows of the Kopetdag,
tall herbaceous vegetation with edificators
Eremurus fuscus, Rumex pamiricus Rech., R.
tianschanicus Losinsk. and Rubia tinctorum
L. has formed. In different parts of the
“Kopetdag”, there are perennial assectators of
phytocoenoses Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss.,
Allium spp., Fritillaria sewerzowii, Muscari
neglectum Guss. ex Ten., Silene coronaria, and
Tulipa spp. (Figs. 3 C, C2 A–N, C5 A–H, C6).
Many of these plants are endemics of Central
Asia. Most of these species are represented
on the plot in the form of introductory
populations.
The vegetation of the sands is represented
by tamarisk plantations, while other
ergasiophytes-psamophytes have not survived
to this day. Therefore, the sandy vegetation
section needs future reconstruction and
the introduction of new ergasiophytes from
Central Asia.
On the eastern side of the plot, its lower
part is occupied by a large section of tugai. It
occupies areas where it was planned to create
walnut and juniper forests (Fig. 2). For various
reasons (probably due to the low quality of
the soil, which did not meet the needs of
these plants) the walnut and juniper forests
were not created. The vegetation of the tugai
section is currently represented by Ulmus
minor Mill. stands with Acer spp., Fraxinus
sogdiana, Juglans regia, and Salix alba L. In the
shrub layer, there are mainly ergasiophytes
originated out of Central Asia. Valuable
introductory populations of Arum korolkowii,
Fritillaria sewerzowii, Tulipa kaufmanniana,
and T. praestans are represented in the
herbaceous cover of tugai (Figs. 3 D & C6 E–G).
To date, the section of tugai needs significant
additions of new ergasiophytes, especially
shrubs and perennials.
Above the section of tugai there are
sections of apple-hawthorn and spruce
forests, which imitate the zonal location
of the vegetation of the Tien Shan. This
compositional solution based on the terrain
of the plot proved to be an excellent example
of high-quality landscape design (Fig. 3 B).
Currently, the apple-hawthorn forest is
represented by a plantation of edificators
Crataegus spp., Malus sieversii and M. sieversii
var. kirghisorum, with the participation of
Plant Introduction • 95/96 17
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
M. niedzwetzkyana and some Acer species.
Unfortunately, hawthorn and apple trees have
reached an extreme age and dying. Therefore,
this section needs to be reconstructed
shortly.
The spruce forest is represented by a
monodominant Picea schrenkiana plantation
with small admixtures of deciduous trees.
This plantation of the park type looks quite
stable. Shrubs and herbaceous plants of
Central Asian flora are absent here. But
there are signs of habitat transformation
under the canopy of spruces. For example,
Geastrum sp. fungus (https://www.inaturalist.
org/observations/95143077) indicating the
formation of a coniferous forest ecosystem,
was recently discovered here. In the future,
this can be used to introduce some Central
Asian plants whose habitats are associated
with coniferous forests.
In the past, considerable resources
were spent on the formation of vegetation
of mountain meadows, but now only the
introductory population of Rosa webbiana
Wall. has survived. Therefore, this section
needs a radical reconstruction.
A sparse plantation of deciduous trees
(e.g., Acer platanoides, Ulmus pumila L., etc.)
has been preserved along the perimeter of
the phytogeographical plot. This plantation
does not play a scientific and landscape-
expositional role today and, therefore, also
requires reconstruction.
Problems and development prospects
The stability of artificial phytocoenoses on
phytogeographical plots is very vulnerable and
related to their experimental prospects. The
rapid or gradual death of ergasiophytes due
to soil and climatic conditions inconsistency,
low naturalization, and other accidents
happen. Since the “Central Asia” plot was
created, several sections (e.g., mountain
meadows and walnut forest) within its
boundaries disappeared. In stable artificial
phytocoenoses that have been formed, many
ergasiophytes that failed to acclimatize or
reproduce have died. It should be noted that
similar phenomena are observed on other
phytogeographical plots of the NBG, where
artificial phytocoenoses exist out of their
natural preferences, for example, in the plot
“Caucasus” (Shynder, 2015).
The purposeful introduction of plants
often remains complicated in predicting the
success so far (Bulakh, 1999). This is especially
true for plants being introduced for the first
time. However, the gradual extinction of the
introduced plants should not be considered an
exclusively negative result because it provides
valuable information for further experiments.
In particular, due to the persistent directed
introduction on the plot “Central Asia”,
exceptionally useful information was
obtained. It was found that the most stable
phytocoenoses are that do not require special
additional resource-intensive measures for
their cultivation in Kyiv: many types of forests
and shrub phytocoenoses, tamarisk thickets,
and mountain meadows of Kopetdag. Thus,
the main task for the future is to continue
the directed introduction in these artificial
phytocoenoses. It is important to note that
due to global warming (Boychenko et al.,
2016), there are favorable conditions for the
successful cultivation of ergasiophytes from
Central Asia.
The problem of interaction of visitors
with plantations is common in the botanical
gardens and arboretums. Scientific collections
of phytogeographical plots of the NBG,
including introductory populations of rare and
ornamental plants and experimental plantings
of new ergasiophytes, are open to visitors. In
this regard, some plants are being stolen from
the plots. After a mass visit to the NBG during
the growing season, much garbage remains
on the plots. Some ergasiophytes die and
disappear due to such pollution and trampling.
However, there are prospects that with the
development of society, its attitude to nature
and green planting will be with greater respect
and understanding.
The number of stray dogs, which are
cared for in Kyiv by volunteers has increased
in recent years. The plot “Central Asia” has
long been a favorite habitat for several dogs,
and they did not influence the ecosystem
of the plot (Fig. C7 A). However, recently, the
number of dogs has increased dramatically,
negatively affecting the plantation of the
plot and the overall visitors and personnel
safety. Another negative zoological aspect is
an extremely high presence of ticks carrying
pathogens. One reason for the large number
of ticks is the uncontrolled breeding of dogs
in the last decade. Therefore, the prospects
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95143077
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95143077
18 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
for developing the phytogeographical plot
“Central Asia” are associated with reducing the
impact of synanthropic and harmful fauna.
An urgent problem is phytopollution of
the territory by invasive plants (Jebb, 2018;
Protopopova & Shevera, 2019; Pyšek et al.,
2020). Thus, among 44 invasive and harmful
plant species that are registered in the NBG
(Shynder et al., 2021), the following species
are noted on the plot “Central Asia” (highly
active species are underlined): Acer negundo,
Ambrosia artemisiifolia L., Asclepias syriaca L.,
Berberis aquifolium Pursh, Celtis occidentalis L.,
Clematis vitalba L., Conium maculatum L.,
Cornus sanguinea subsp. australis, Corydalis
caucasica DC., Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall,
Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden., Impatiens
parviflora DC., Lonicera caprifolium L., L.
ruprechtiana Regel, Lycium barbarum L., Morus
alba L., Parthenocissus vitacea (Knerr) Hitchc.,
Robinia pseudoacacia L., Rumex patientia L.,
Solidago canadensis L., Symphytum asperum
Lepech., Tilia × europaea L., Ulmus pumila,
Vitis amurensis Rupr., and V. riparia Michx.
(Fig. C7 B–E). During the care of the plot, a
constant struggle is carried out with these
plants.
In the NBG, the naturalization of
ergasiophytes and their escape beyond the
places of cultivation continues. In addition
to invasive plants, less active ergasiophytes
spread to the plot “Central Asia” from
neighboring plots (i.e., plots “Caucasus”, “Rare
Species of Ukrainian Flora”, and “Lianas”). For
example, the following plants escaped from
the plot “Caucasus” and formed spontaneous
populations there: Arum elongatum Steven
(Fig. C7 F), A. maculatum L., Corydalis
caucasica, Heracleum sosnowskyi, and Nepeta
grandiflora M. Bieb. Some plants, such as
Galanthus woronowii Losinsk., Staphylea
pinnata L., Taxus baccata L. (Fig. C7 G–H)
are represented there by single individuals
or clones and did not form a spontaneous
population. Ornithogalum boucheanum (Kunth)
Asch., O. fimbriatum Willd., O. orthophyllum
Ten. subsp. kochii (Parl.) C. Zahariadi and
Melica altissima L. spontaneously invaded the
artificial phytocoenoses of the plot “Central
Asia” from the plot “Rare Species of Ukrainian
Flora”. Clematis vitalba, Hedera helix L.,
Lonicera caprifolium, Parthenocissus vitacea,
and Vitis riparia invaded this plot from the
plot “Lianas”. It should be noted that woody
lianas are the most highly invasive plants in
the NBG in general (Shynder et al., 2021).
Among ergasiophytes of Central Asian
origin, invasive plants are practically absent
in the spontaneous flora of the NBG (Shynder,
2019b). However, an adult specimen of Ulmus
pumila on the eastern edge of the plot “Central
Asia” poses a certain danger. It is advisable to
destroy this tree during the reconstruction
of the plot plantations. Some ergasiophytes
of the plot “Central Asia” (e.g., Prunus spp.,
Rumex pamiricus) show a particular invasive
ability. Nevertheless, the phytogeographical
plot “Central Asia” is not the main center of
invasive plants spreading in the NBG.
Conclusions
Thus, the modern structure of the flora of the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden was
formed as a result of labor-intensive scientific
and experimental work on the directed
introduction of plants from Central Asia.
During the entire period of the plot’s existence,
over 1,000 plant species have been tested on
it, but only 70 species of ergasiophytes have
survived to date. The main reason for the mass
loss of introduced plants is the significant
difference in climatic conditions between Kyiv
and most regions of Central Asia.
It was found that 308 species and
subspecies of vascular plants grow in the
plantations on the plot “Central Asia”,
of which 60 % are plants of the Central
Asian flora. Among peculiarities while
keeping a collection of living plants on the
phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” is
that alien ergasiophytes grow here as part
of artificially formed phytocoenoses that
model certain regions of Central Asia. Some
ergasiophytes are naturalized and formed
introductory populations. On the plot,
Central Asian (25.0 %), Eurasian (21.2 %),
Paleoarctic (13.0 %), and sub-Mediterranean
(10.9 %) types of ranges predominate
among the plants of Central Asian flora.
Among them, the largest number belongs to
hemicryptophytes (28.4 %). However, there
are quite a lot of phanerophytes (25.1 %),
cryptophytes (25.1 %), and therophytes
(19.1 %). Concerning the habitat conditions
among the Central Asian plants, plants of
Plant Introduction • 95/96 19
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
shrub thickets and edges (25.5 %) and forest
species (20.7 %) predominate. In general,
among the introduced plants, those growing
in the temperate continental regions of
Central Asia are the best adapted to the
conditions of the NBG.
One of the most valuable features of the
flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central
Asia” is the species complexes of Acer, Allium,
Crataegus, Tamarix, and Tulipa genera.
Further introduction of species of these
genera is promising. Among the present
plot’s diversity, 24 species of ergasiophytes
are listed in the red books of Central Asian
countries. Thus, the phytogeographical
plot “Central Asia” is an important center
of species diversity of introduced plants of
Central Asian flora and plays a significant role
in the conservation of many plant species,
including rare, endemic, and relict ones.
Acknowledgements
We express our sincere gratitude to the
doctor of biological sciences, professor of
the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden,
P.E. Bulakh for consultations on the taxonomic
diversity of the phytogeographical plot
“Central Asia”; to the Ph.D., curator of the
Coniferetum of the M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden, O.P. Pokhylchenko for help
in identification of gymnosperms; and to the
curator of the Herbarium KOR of the Institute
of Dendrology of Polish Academy of Sciences
(Kórnik, Poland), Jerzy Zieliński for valuable
guidance on species of the genus Tamarix.
References
Annabayramov, B. (Ed.). (2011). The Red Book of
Turkmenistan. Vol. 1: Plants and fungi. 3rd ed.
Publishing House “Turkmenistan”. (In Russian)
Baitulin, I.O. (Ed.). (2014). The Red Book of
Kazakhstan. Vol. 2. P. 2. Plants. 2nd ed. Apr Print
XXI. (In Russian)
Baranovski, B., Roschina, N., Karmyzova, L., &
Ivanko, I. (2018). Comparison of commonly
used ecological scales with the Belgard Plant
Ecomorph System. Biosystems Diversity, 26(4),
286–291. https://doi.org/10.15421/011843
Baum, B.R. (1978). The genus Tamarix. The Israel
Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Boychenko, S., Voloshchuk, V., Movchan, Y.,
Serdjuchenko, N., Tkachenko, V.,
Tyshchenko, O., & Savchenko, S. (2016).
Features of climate change on Ukraine:
scenarios, consequences for nature and
agroecosystems. Proceedings of the National
Aviation University, 4(69), 96–113. (In Ukrainian).
https://doi.org/10.18372/2306-1472.69.11061
Bulakh, P.E. (1994). Onions of the natural flora of
Central Asia and their culture in Ukraine. Naukova
Dumka. (In Ukrainian)
Bulakh, P.E. (1999). Prognostication as a mandatory
stage of introductory work. Bulletin of the Taras
Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Introduction
and Preservation of Plant Diversity, 1, 34–35.
(In Ukrainian)
Bulakh, P.E. (2010). Theory and methods of
prognostication in the introduction of plants.
Naukova Dumka. (In Ukrainian)
Bulakh, P.E., & Didenko, S.Y. (1999). Phenomenon
of quasisenility in introduced populations.
Bulletin of the State Nikita Botanical Garden, 81, 16–
19. (In Ukrainian)
Bulakh, P.E., & Popil, N.I. (2010, October 11–15).
Wild relatives of cultivated plants and the
need for their protection. In Proceedings of the
international conference “The Plant Kingdom in
the Red Data Book of Ukraine: Implementing the
Global Strategy for Plant Conservation” (p. 242).
M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany of the NAS of
Ukraine. (In Ukrainian)
Chuvikina, N. (2016). Botanical garden on Zverinets.
Publisher Sidorenko V.B. (In Ukrainian)
Clements, F.E. (1920). Plant indicators. The relation of
plant communities to process and practice. Carnegie
Institution of Washington.
Didenko, S.Y., & Shynder, O.I. (2020). Features of
the species composition of phytocoenoses in the
botanical and geographical plot “Caucasus” of the
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the
NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv). Journal of Native and Alien
Plant Studies, 16, 45–57. (In Ukrainian). https://
doi.org/10.37555/2707-3114.16.2020.219814
Didukh, Y.P. (2007). Geographical analysis of flora:
history, present time and future. Ukrainian
Botanical Journal, 64(4), 485–507. (In Ukrainian)
GBIF. (2022). Global biodiversity information facility.
https://www.gbif.org
Goloskokov, V.P. (1963). Tamarix L. In N.V. Pavlov
(Ed.), Flora of Kazakhstan. Vol. 6 (pp. 178–190).
Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR.
(In Russian)
Grudzinskaya, I. (1979). Note on the genus Celtis L.
in USSR. Novivtates Systematicae Plantarum
Vascularium, 16, 90–95. (In Russian)
https://doi.org/10.15421/011843
https://doi.org/10.18372/2306-1472.69.11061
https://doi.org/10.37555/2707-3114.16.2020.219814
https://doi.org/10.37555/2707-3114.16.2020.219814
https://www.gbif.org
20 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Grytsenko, V.V. (2002). Introductive populations
of species of genera Arum L. (Araceae Juss.)
in M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden
of the NAS of Ukraine. Plant Introduction, 13,
70–76. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.5281/
zenodo.3333787
Ishmuratova, M.Y., Tleukenova, S.U.,
Gavrilkova, E.A., & Dodonova, A.S. (2017). Key
to vascular plants of Central Kazakhstan. Poligrafist.
(In Russian)
IUCN. (2022). The IUCN red list of threatened species.
Version 2021-3. https://www.iucnredlist.org
Jebb, M. (2018). Sharing information and policy on
the potentially invasive plants in botanic gardens.
http://www.botanicgardens.eu/aliens.htm
Kamelin, R.V. (Ed.). (1993–2015). Conspectus florae
Asiae Mediae. Vols. 10–11. FAN. (In Russian)
Kharkevych, S.S. (Ed.). (1972). Introduction in Ukraine
of useful plants of the natural flora of the USSR.
Naukova Dumka. (In Russian)
Khassanov, F.O. (Ed.). (2016). The Red Book
of Uzbekistan. 1. Plants. Chinor ENK Press.
(In Russian)
Kleopov, Y.D. (1990). Analysis of the flora of deciduous
forests of the European part of the USSR. Naukova
Dumka. (In Russian)
Kokhno N.A. (Ed.). (1997). Catalogue of plants of
the M.M. Gryshko Central Botanical Garden.
Naukova Dumka. (In Ukrainian)
Kokhno, N.A., & Kurdyuk, A.M. (1994). Theoretical
bases and experience of introduction of woody plants
in Ukraine. Naukova Dumka. (In Ukrainian)
Kolomiychuk, V.P. (2020). Structure, dynamics
and protection of coastal ecosystems
phyitodiversity of the sea of Azov [Abstract of
Dr. thesis, M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany
of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine].
(In Ukrainian)
Kononov, V., & Moljkova, I. (1974). Genus Arum L.
in URSS. Novitates Systematicae Plantarum
Vascularium, 11, 75–83. (In Russian)
Kuznetsov, S.I., Levon, F.M., & Pushkar, V.V. (2013).
Assortment of trees, shrubs and vines for landscaping
in Ukraine. CP Comprint. (In Ukrainian)
Logginov, V.B. (1980). On some specific ecological
properties of introductory populations of forest
trees. Introduction and Acclimatization of Plants in
Ukraine, 16, 2–32. (In Russian)
Lukash, O.V. (2009). Flora of vascular plants of Eastern
Polissya: structure and dynamics. Phytosociocenter.
(In Ukrainian)
Malyshev, L.I. (1972). Floristic spectra of the Soviet
Union. In The history of the Flora and Vegetation of
Eurasia. (pp. 17–40). Nauka. (In Russian)
Meshkova, V.I., Sikura, I.I., & Kuznetsov, S.I. (1990).
Recommendations on the principles of forming expositions
of natural flora in botanical gardens and parks. Central
Republican Botanical Garden. (In Russian)
Moisienko, I.I. (2011). Flora of the Northern Black
Sea Coast (structural analysis, synanthropization,
protection). [PhD thesis abstract, Taras Shevchenko
National University of Kyiv]. (In Ukrainian)
Negrash, J.M., & Shynder, O.I. (2021). The results of the
inventory of the species composition of vascular
plants on the botanical and geographical plot
“Central Asia” (M.M. Gryshko NBG). In Proceedings
of the third all-Ukrainian scientific and practical
conference “European Integration of Environmental
Policy of Ukraine” (pp. 49–52). (In Ukrainian)
Novosad, V.V. (2005–2007). Stepophyton of the
Crimean Plain (phyto and flora diversity. Structural
and comparative analysis, ecotopological
differentiation, endemism, ecological-
florogenesis core). Bulleten of the National Science
and Natural Museum, 4–5, 398–433. (In Ukrainian)
Osadchy, V.I., Kosovets, O.O., & Babichenko, V.M.
(Eds.). (2010). Climate of Kyiv. Nika-Center.
(In Ukrainian)
Ostashevsky, A.Y. (1988). Peculiarities of flowering
and fruiting of hawthorns of the flora of Central
Asia in the CRBG of the Academy of Sciences
of the Ukrainian SSR. In Abstracts of the Second
republican conference on medical botany (p. 143).
(In Russian)
Pavlov, N.V. (Ed.). (1956–1966). Flora of Kazakhstan.
Vols. 1–9. Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh
SSR. (In Russian)
POWO. (2022). Plants of the world online. Facilitated
by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. https://
powo.science.kew.org
Protopopova, V.V., & Shevera, M.V. (2019).
Invasive species in the flora of Ukraine. I. The
group of highly active species. Geo&Bio, 17, 116–
135. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.15407/
gb.2019.17.116
Pyšek, P., Hulme, P.E., Simberloff, D., Bacher, S.,
Blackburn, T.M., Carlton, J.T., Dawson, W., Essl, F.,
Foxcroft, L.C., Genovesi, P., Jeschke, J.M., Kühn, I.,
Liebhold, A.M., Mandrak, N.E., Meyerson, L.A.,
Pauchard, A., Pergl, J., Roy, H.E., Seebens, H.,
van Kleunen, M., Vilà, M., Wingfield, M.J., &
Richardson, D.M. (2020). Scientists’ warning on
invasive alien species. Biological Reviews, 95(6),
1511–1534. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12627
Pyšek, P., Richardson, D.M., Rejmánek, M.,
Webster, G.L., Williamson, M., & Kirschner, J.
(2004). Alien plants in checklists and floras:
towards better communication between
taxonomists and ecologists. Taxon. 53(1), 131–
143. https://doi.org/10.2307/4135498
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3333787
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3333787
https://www.iucnredlist.org
http://www.botanicgardens.eu/aliens.htm
https://powo.science.kew.org
https://powo.science.kew.org
https://doi.org/10.15407/gb.2019.17.116
https://doi.org/10.15407/gb.2019.17.116
https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12627
https://doi.org/10.2307/4135498
Plant Introduction • 95/96 21
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
Rahimi, F., Ibodzoda, K., Abdusalyamov, I.,
Yakubova, M., Saidov, A., Hisoriev, H. (Eds.).
(2017). The Red Book of the Republic of Tajikistan.
Vol. 1. Flora, Dushanbe.
Raunkiaer, C. (1934). The life forms of plants and
statistical plant geography. Clarendon Press.
Rusanov, F.N. (1944). Forestry value of tamarisk.
Proceedings of the Turkmen branch of the Academy
of Sciences of the USSR, 5, 33–49. (In Russian)
Rusanov, F.N. (1949). Central Asian tamarisks.
Academy of Sciences of the Uzbek SSR.
(In Russian)
Rusanov, F.N. (1950). New methods of plant
introduction. Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden,
7, 27–36. (In Russian)
Shisha, E., Sikura, I., & Kuchuk, N. (2008). In vitro
conservation of Allium L. biodiversity. Scientific
Bulletin of Uzhgorod University. Series Biology, 24,
244–254. (In Ukrainian)
Shukurov, E.D. (2006). The Red Book of the Kyrgyz
Republic. Ed. 2. Bishkek.
Shumyk, M.I. (2016). Introduced population as
a main element for the formation of botanical
exposition and for optimization of urban
ecosystems. Scientific Bulletin National Forestry
University of Ukraine, 26(3), 208–216. (In Ukrainian)
Shynder, O.I. (2015). The vegetation cover of
the phyto-geographical plot “Caucasus” of
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of
the NAS of Ukraine. Plant Introduction, 65, 30–
37. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.5281/
zenodo.2460013
Shynder, O.I. (2019a). Spontaneous flora of
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of
the NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv). 1. Native plants. Plant
Introduction, 81, 18–30. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.
org/10.5281/zenodo.2650438
Shynder, O.I. (2019b). Spontaneous flora of
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of
the NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv). 3. Aliens plants:
ergasiophytes. Plant Introduction, 83, 14–
36. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.5281/
zenodo.3404102
Shynder, O.I. (2019c). Spontaneous flora of
M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the
NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv). 4. Alien plants: xenophytes.
Plant Introduction, 84, 18–33. (In Ukrainian).
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3566608
Shynder, O., Glukhova, S., & Mykhailyk, S. (2021).
Invasive and harmful plants in botanical
gardens and arboretums: monitoring, negative
impact, evaluation methods. In Proceedings of
the international scientific conference “Conservation
of plants in connection with climate changes and
biological invasions” (pp. 305–312). (In Ukrainian)
Shynder, O.I., Nehrash, J.M., & Baransky O.R.
(2014). Introduction’s populations of Scopolia
carniolica Jacq. (Solanaceae) of different
geographical origin in M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine. Plant
Introduction, 63, 15–21. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.
org/10.5281/zenodo.1555080
Sikura, I.I. (1970). Technical and working project
of the botanical-geographic plot “Central Asia.
Publishing house of the Botanical Garden of
the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR.
(In Russian)
Sikura, I.I. (1975). The natural flora of Central Asia is
a source of plant introduction in Ukraine. Naukova
Dumka. (In Russian)
Sikura, I.I. (1982). Relocation of plants of the natural
flora of Central Asia to Ukraine. Naukova Dumka.
(In Russian)
Sikura, I.I. (1985). Results of the migration of plants
of the natural flora of Central Asia and Kazakhstan
to Ukraine. Introduction and acclimatization of
plants, 4, 29–32. (In Russian)
Sikura, J.J. (1969). Consequences and prospects
of introduction of eremurs of natural flora of
Central Asia in Ukraine. In Proceedings of the
IV Congress of the Ukrainian Botanical Society
(pp. 222–224). (In Russian)
Sokolov, S.Y., & Svyazeva, O.A. (1965). Geography of
woody plants of the USSR. Leningrad. (In Russian)
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2018,
December 28). Encyclopedia Britannica. Central
Asia. Facilitated by the Britannica Group. https://
www.britannica.com/place/Central-Asia
Thellung, A. (1922). Zur Terminologie der Adventiv-
und Ruderalfloristik. Allgemeine botanische Zeitschrift
für Systematik, Floristik, Pflanzengeographie,
24/25(9–12), 36–42.
Tkachenko, V.I. (1986). Central Asian wild roses
introduced in the botanical garden of the Academy
of Sciences of the Kirghiz SSR. Publishing house
Frunze. (In Russian)
Tzvelev, N.N. (1993). Notes on some Caucasian
Asteraceae and Araceae. Bulletin of Moscow
Society of Naturalists. Biological series, 98(6), 99–
108. (In Russian)
Vvedenskiy, A.I. (1935). Allium. In V.L. Komarov (Ed.),
Flora of URSS. Vol. 4. (pp. 112–280). Publishing
house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
(In Russian)
Vvedenskiy, A.I. (Ed.). (1968–1987). Conspectus
Florae Asiae Mediae. Vols. 1–9. Publishing house
FAN. (In Russian)
Walter, H., & Straka, H. (1970). Arealkunde: floristisch-
historische Geobotanik. Ulmer.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2460013
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2460013
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2650438
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2650438
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3404102
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3404102
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3566608
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1555080
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1555080
https://www.britannica.com/place/Central-Asia
https://www.britannica.com/place/Central-Asia
22 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Zaimenko, N.V., Gaponenko, M.B.,
Rakhmetov, D.B., Shumyk, M.I., &
Smilyanets, N.M. (2018). M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden of the National Academy of
Sciences of Ukraine formation and achievements
(to the 100th anniversary of the NAS of Ukraine).
Plant Introduction, 80, 3–10. (In Ukrainian). https://
doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2576041
Zemkova, R.I., & Sikura, I.I. (1980). Pests and
diseases of tree and shrub species of the flora
of Central Asia, introduced into the Central
Republican Botanical Garden of the Academy of
Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR. In Useful plants of
natural flora and their use in the national economy
(pp. 154–160). Naukova Dumka. (In Russian)
Appendix A. Cheklist of the flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” (M.M. Gryshko National
Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine).
GYMNOSPERMS. PINOPSIDA
CUPRESSACEAE
1. Juniperus sabina L.: Erg. CA, N113-00050. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Subhrub; Chamaephyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1958, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875701
2. Juniperus seravschanica Kom. Erg.CA, N113-00052. – N.r.: AsCW (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1953, Tajikistan, Gissar Range; 1958, Kyrgyzstan, Kyrgyz Ala-Too Range
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874169
3. Platycladus orientalis (L.) Franco: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95178062
4. Thuja occidentalis L.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95178061
PINACEAE
5. Picea schrenkiana Fisch. et Mey.: Erg. CA, N113-00063. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. –
Intr.: 1958, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874161
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180105
TAXACEAE
6. Taxus baccata L.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: EuW-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102075373
Applied abbreviations
FCA – Native flora of the Central Asia region
The origin of plants (immigration groups):
Native – native plant species;
Erg. CA – ergasiophyte, specially introduced from Central
Asia (for such taxa their inventory number is marked);
Erg. non CA – ergasiophyte was not introduced from
Central Asia;
Escaped – escaped plant (ergasiophygophyte);
N. r. – native range:
Am – American
Anat – Anatolian
As – Asian
Bor – Boreal
Cauc – Caucasian
Cosm – cosmopolitan
EuAs – Eurasian
EuAs-des. – Eurasian desert
EuAs-for.-step. – Eurasian forest-steppe
EuAs-step. – Eurasian steppe
Eu-subMed – Euro-sub-Mediterranean
FE – Far Eastern
Him – Himalayan
Hol – Holarctical
Med – Mediterranean (in a broad sense – sub-Mediterranean)
PArct – Paleoarctical
C – central
E – east
N – north
S – south
W – west
Cultig. – cultigenic origin
(Y) – the taxon is present in the natural flora of Central Asia
(N) – the taxon is absent in the natural flora of Central Asia
L. f. – plant life-form
Hab. – habitat
Intr. – introduction (for plants, specially those introduced
from Central Asia, the year and original locality are
indicated in case if such information is preserved)
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2576041
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2576041
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875701
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874169
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95178062
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95178061
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874161
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180105
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102075373
Plant Introduction • 95/96 23
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
GYMNOSPERMS. GNETOPSIDA
EPHEDRACEAE
7. Ephedra equisetina Bunge: Erg. CA, N113-00039. – N. r.: EuAs-des (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Clay. –
Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, Chuli settlement
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102012803
ANGIOSPERMS. MONOCOTS
AMARYLLIDACEAE
8. Allium aflatunense B. Fedtsch: Erg. CA, N113-0007. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows.
– Intr.: 1961, Tajikistan, Gissar Range
9. Allium altissimum Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00006. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876890
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876897
10. Allium caeruleum Pall.: Erg. CA, N113-00011. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Talgar Gorge. – Note. The typical form (var. caeruleum) and live-bearing form
(var. bulbiferum (Schrenk ex Fisch. & C.A. Mey.) Ledeb.) are presented on the plot “Central Asia”. Typical plants of
A. caeruleum, without bulbs in the inflorescence we initially considered another species – Allium caesium Schrenk,
but long-term observations have shown that these two forms are one species, and they often grow side by side, even
in clonal offspring of one mother plant. Therefore, var. bulbiferum has no systematic significance and is an ecological
morphotype. As for the real A. caesium, in soviet times this species was indeed part of the collection (Bulakh, 1994;
Kokhno, 1997), but it has not survived to date.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102075382
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/103971497
11. Allium cristophii Trautv.: Erg. CA, N113-00010. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows. –
Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, border checkpoint Chaek
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875718
12. Allium decipiens Fisch. ex Schult. & Schult.f.: Erg. CA?, N113-00108. – N. r.: EuAs-step (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875714
13. Allium fetisowii Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00109. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872701
14. Allium nutans L.: Erg. CA, N113-00110. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102076550
15. Allium rosenbachianum Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00111. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872702
16. Allium schoenoprasum L.: Erg. CA, N113-00015. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic.
– Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
17. Allium stipitatum Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00112. – N. r.: AsCW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872698
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875707
18. Allium strictum Schrad.: Erg. CA, N113-00016. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. –
Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
19. Allium tuberosum Rottler ex Spreng.: Escaped (from flower beds). – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102076552
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/97625978
20. Allium turkestanicum Regel: Erg. CA. – N.r.: AsC (Y). – L.f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows. – Intr.: 2019,
Canada, Edmonton
21. Galanthus lagodechianus Kem.-Nath. (= G. cabardensis Koss): Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N).
– L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869612
22. Galanthus woronowii Losinsk.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101882603
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869614
ARACEAE
23. Arum orientale M. Bieb. subsp. orientale (= Arum elongatum Steven): Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.:
subMedE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875709
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757163
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102012803
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876890
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876897
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102075382
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/103971497
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875718
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875714
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872701
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102076550
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872702
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872698
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875707
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102076552
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/97625978
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869612
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101882603
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869614
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875709
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757163
24 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
24. Arum korolkowii Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00021. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.:
1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, border checkpoint Chaek
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872860
25. Arum maculatum L.: Escaped (from the plot «Caucasus»). – N. r.: EuW-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876891
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757164
ASPARAGACEAE
26. Asparagus officinalis L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874167
27. Muscari armeniacum H.J. Veitch: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: subMedE (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873444
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870537
28. Muscari neglectum Guss. ex Ten.: Erg. CA, N113-00215. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873443
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876889
29. Ornithogalum boucheanum (Kunth) Asch.: Escaped (from the plot “Rare Species of Ukrainian Flora”). – N. r.: EuAs-
step (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757225
30. Ornithogalum fimbriatum Willd.: Escaped (from the plot “Rare Species of Ukrainian Flora”). – N. r.: subMedE (N). –
L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
31. Ornithogalum orthophyllum Ten. subsp. kochii (Parl.) C. Zahariadi: Escaped (from the plot “Rare Species of Ukrainian
Flora”). – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875705
32. Polygonatum latifolium (Jacq.) Desf.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872694
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876896
33. Polygonatum multiflorum (L.) All.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
34. Puschkinia scilloides Adams (= Puschkinia hyacinthoides Baker): Erg. non CA. – N. r.: subMedE (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867985
35. Scilla bifolia L.: Native. – N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
ASPHODELIACEAE
36. Eremurus fuscus (O. Fedtsch.) Vved.: Erg. CA, N113-00040. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.:
Steppes. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91376284
37. Hemerocallis fulva (L.) L.: Erg. non CA (ergasiolypophyte). – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
CYPERACEAE
38. Carex leporina L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
39. Carex hirta L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
40. Carex praecox Schreb.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
41. Carex spicata Huds.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
IRIDACEAE
42. Iris halophila Pall.: Erg. CA, N113-00047. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. – Intr.:
1962, Kazakhstan, Almaty region
LILIACEAE
43. Fritillaria sewerzowii Regel (= Korolkowia sewerzowii Regel): Erg. CA, N113-00053. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1961, Western Tian Shan, Qurama Mountains
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870538
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95859276
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557330
44. Gagea fragifera (Vill.) Ehr. Bayer & G. López (= G. erubescens (Besser) Schult. & Schult. f.): Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y).
– L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870541
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872860
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876891
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757164
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874167
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873444
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870537
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873443
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876889
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101757225
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875705
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872694
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876896
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867985
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91376284
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870538
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95859276
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557330
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870541
Plant Introduction • 95/96 25
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
45. Gagea lutea (L.) Ker Gawl.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
46. Gagea minima (L.) Ker Gawl.: Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
47. Gagea transversalis Steven (= G. paczoskii (Zapał.) Grossh.): Native. – N. r.: EuE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875697
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869611
48. Tulipa bifloriformis Vved. (= T. biflora auct. non Pall.): Erg. CA, N113-00281. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. – Intr.: 1962, Kazakhstan, Jambyl Region
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875690
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875688
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870545
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870530
49. Tulipa fosteriana W.Irving: Erg. CA, N113-00282. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875686
50. Tulipa hybrida hort.: Erg. non CA. – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872699
51. Tulipa kaufmanniana Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00088. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. –
Intr.: 1961, Western Tian Shan, Uzbekistan, River Angren valley
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870534
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875696
52. Tulipa sprengeri Baker: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: Anat (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875719
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870842
53. Tulipa praestans H.B. May: Erg. CA, N113-00089. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. –
Intr.: 1962, Western Tian Shan, Qurama Mountains
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875695
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870543
54. Tulipa suaveolens Roth (= T. schrenkii Regel): Erg. CA, N113-00093. – N. r.: EuAs-step (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, the outskirts of Taldykorgan
55. Tulipa undulatifolia Boiss. var. micheliana (Hoog) Wilford (= T. micheliana Hoog): Erg. CA, N113-00285. – N. r.: AsC
(Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes. – Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, border checkpoint Chaek
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873445
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875700
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873445
56. Tulipa urumiensis Stapf (= T. tarda Stapf.): Erg. CA, N113-00090. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. –
Hab.: Steppes. – Intr.: 1962, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
POACEAE
57. Bromus sterilis L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
58. Bromus tectorum L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
59. Calamagrostis epigejos (L.) Roth: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867972
60. Dactylis glomerata L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
61. Digitaria ischaemum (Schreb.) Muehl.: Xen. – N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
62. Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.: Xen. – N. r.: AsSE (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
63. Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P.Beauv.: Xen. – N. r.: As (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
64. Elymus repens (L.) Gould: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
65. Lolium pratense (Huds.) Darbysh. (= Festuca pratensis Huds.): Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
66. Melica altissima L.: Escaped (from the plot “Rare Species of Ukrainian Flora”). – N. r.: EuAs-for-step (Y). – L. f.:
Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
67. Phleum pratense L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
68. Poa annua L.: Native. – N. r.: Cosm (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
69. Poa nemoralis L.: Native. – N. r.: Parct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
70. Poa pratensis L.: Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
71. Setaria pumila (Poir.) Roem. & Schult. (= S. glauca (L.) P. Beauv.): Xen. – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. –
Hab.: Synanthropic
72. Setaria verticillata (L.) P.Beauv.: Xen. – N. r.: AsSE (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875697
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869611
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875690
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875688
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870545
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870530
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875686
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872699
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870534
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875696
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875719
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870842
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875695
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870543
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873445
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875700
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873445
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867972
26 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
ANGIOSPERMS. EUDICOTS
ACERACEAE
73. Acer campestre L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94113034
74. Acer monspessulanum L. subsp. turcomanicum (Pojark.) A.E. Murray (= A. turcomanicum Pojark.): Erg. CA, N113-00002. – N. r.:
AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, former settlement Archabil (Firuza)
75. Acer negundo L.: Escaped (from tree plantations). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
76. Acer pentapomicum Stewart ex Brand: Erg. CA, N113-00000. – N. r.: AsC-Him (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Forests. – Intr.: 1965, Tajikistan, Gissar Range
77. Acer platanoides L. subsp. platanoides: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/65204449
78. Acer platanoides subsp. turkestanicum (Pax) P.C. de Jong (= A. turkestanicum Pax): Erg. CA, N113-00003. – N. r.: AsC
(Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1961, Western Tian Shan, Chatkal Range
79. Acer pseudoplatanus L.: Escaped (from tree plantations). – N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875711
80. Acer tataricum L. subsp. semenovii (Regel & Herder) A.E. Murray (= A. semenovii Regel. et Herd): Erg. CA, N113-
00001. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
ADOXACEAE
81. Sambucus nigra L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
82. Viburnum lantana L.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: EuW-subMed (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869616
AMARANTHACEAE
83. Amaranthus retroflexus L.: Xen. – N. r.: AmC (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
84. Atriplex oblongifolia Waldst. & Kit.: Native. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Clay
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874163
85. Atriplex patula L.: Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
86. Atriplex sagittata Borkh.: Xen. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181444
87. Chenopodiastrum hybridum (L.) S. Fuentes, Uotila & Borsch (= Chenopodium hybridum L.): Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). –
L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
88. Chenopodium album L.: Native. – N. r.: Cosm (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
89. Chenopodium betaceum Andrz.: Xen. – N. r.: subMedE (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
90. Chenopodium opulifolium Schrad.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
91. Chenopodium suecicum J. Murr: Xen. – N. r.: As (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
ANACARDIACEAE
92. Rhus typhina L.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867984
APIACEAE
93. Aegopodium podagraria L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
94. Anthriscus sylvestris (L.) Hoffm.: Native. – N. r.: Cosm (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
95. Chaerophyllum bulbosum L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/79394819
96. Conium maculatum L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
97. Falcaria vulgaris Bernh.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
98. Heracleum sibiricum L.: Native. – N.r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
99. Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N). – L. f.: Biennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
100. Torilis japonica (Houtt.) DC.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsS (N). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
APOCYNACEAE
101. Asclepias syriaca L.: Escaped (from the former plot “System of Higher Plants”). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
102. Vincetoxicum hirundinaria Medik.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95260107
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94113034
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/65204449
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875711
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869616
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874163
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181444
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867984
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/79394819
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95260107
Plant Introduction • 95/96 27
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
ARALIACEAE
103. Hedera helix L.: Escaped (from the plots “Caucasus” and “Lianas”). – N. r.: EuW-subMed (N). – L. f.: Liana;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869618
ASTERACEAE
104. Achillea millefolium L. subsp. collina (Wirtg.) Oborný: Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. –
Hab.: Meadows
105. Achillea nobilis L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs-for-step (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94014186
106. Achillea pannonica Scheele: Native. – N. r.: EuC-EuE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91379730
107. Achillea setacea Waldst. & Kit.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
108. Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.: Xen. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
109. Arctium × ambiguum (Celak) Nym. (= A. lappa × A. minus (Hill) Bernh.): Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Biennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
110. Arctium lappa L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
111. Arctium tomentosum Mill.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
112. Artemisia absinthium L.: Xen. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Chamaephyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873447
113. Artemisia annua L.: Xen. – N. r.: AsE (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
114. Artemisia vulgaris L.: Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
115. Crepis foetida L. subsp. rhoeadifolia (M.Bieb.) Celak.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.:
Steppes
116. Erigeron annuus (L.) Desf (= Stenactis annua (L.) Cass. ex Less.): Xen. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte.
– Hab.: Synanthropic
117. Erigeron canadensis L.: Xen. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
118. Galinsoga parviflora Cav.: Xen. – N. r.: AmS (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
119. Lactuca serriola L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
120. Picris hieracioides L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
121. Solidago canadensis L.: Escaped (from flower beds). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
122. Sonchus oleraceus L.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101699361
123. Taraxacum officinale aggr.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
124. Taraxacum proximum (Dahlst.) Dahlst.: Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875699)
BALSAMINACEAE
125. Impatiens parviflora DC.: Xen. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Forests
BERBERIDACEAE
126. Berberis aquifolium Pursh: Escaped. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Subhrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869613
127. Berberis vulgaris L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181450
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94131463
BETULACEAE
128. Corylus colurna L.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: subMedE (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867988
BORAGINACEAE
129. Anchusa officinalis L.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
130. Symphytum asperum Lepech.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876898
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869618
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94014186
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91379730
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873447
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101699361
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875699)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869613
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181450
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94131463
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867988
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876898
28 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
BRASSICACEAE
131. Alliaria petiolata (M.Bieb.) Cavara & Grande: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Forests
132. Berteroa incana (L.) DC.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
133. Bunias orientalis L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
134. Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik.: Xen. – N. r.: subMedE (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
135. Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L.) DC.: Escaped (from the former plot “System of Higher Plants”). – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.:
Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/53186234
136. Sisymbrium loeselii L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
137. Sisymbrium officinale (L.) Scop.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
CAMPANULACEAE
138. Campanula bononiensis L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
139. Campanula rapunculoides L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges
CANNABACEAE
140. Celtis caucasica Willd.: Erg. CA, N113-00136. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875708
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94014187
141. Celtis occidentalis L.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Forests
142. Humulus lupulus L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
CAPRIFOLIACEAE
143. Knautia arvensis (L.) Coult.: Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278363
144. Lonicera caprifolium L.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Liana; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867987
145. Lonicera micrantha Trautv. ex Regel: Erg. CA, N113-00201. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges
146. Lonicera × notha Zabel (= L. ruprechtiana × L. tatarica): Escaped (spontaneous hybrid). – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Shrub;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
147. Lonicera ruprechtiana Regel: Escaped (from the plot «Far East»). – N. r.: FE (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875710
148. Lonicera tatarica L.: Erg. CA, N113-000578. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
149. Lonicera xylosteum L.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: Bor (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
150. Valeriana pratensis Dierb. (= V. collina Wallr.): Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.:
Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876888
CARYOPHYLLACEAE
151. Cerastium holosteoides Fries: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Chamaephyte. – Hab.: Meadows
152. Cerastium semidecandrum L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
153. Rabelera holostea (L.) M.T. Sharples & E.A. Tripp (= Stellaria holostea L.): Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cau (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Chamaephyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/79393505
154. Saponaria officinalis L.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
155. Silene coronaria (L.) Clairv. (= Coronaria coriacea (Moench) Schischk. & Gorschk.): Erg. CA, N113-00261. – N. r.:
subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
156. Silene latifolia Poir. subsp. alba (Miller) Greuter & Burdet (= Melandrium album (Mill.) Garcke): Native. – N. r.: EuAs
(Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
157. Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke (= S. latifolia (Mill.) Rendle et Britt.): Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
158. Stellaria media (L.) Vill.: Native. – N. r.: Cosm (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/53186234
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875708
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94014187
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278363
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867987
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875710
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876888
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/79393505
Plant Introduction • 95/96 29
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
CELASTRACEAE
159. Euonymus europaeus L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
CONVOLVULACEAE
160. Convolvulus arvensis L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
CORNACEAE
161. Cornus sanguinea L. subsp. australis (C.A.Mey.) Jáv. (= Swida australis (C.A. Mey.) Pojark. ex Grossh.): Erg. non CA.
– N. r.: subMedE (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384255
CRASSULACEAE
162. Hylotelephium maximum (L.) Holub subsp. maximum: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867976
DIPSACACEAE
163. Dipsacus pilosus L.: Native. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557334
164. Scabiosa ochroleuca L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsC (N). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
ELAEAGNACEAE
165. Elaeagnus angustifolia L.: Erg. CA, N113-00161. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181446
EUPHORBIACEAE
166. Euphorbia cyparissias L.: Native. – N. r.: EuC-subMed (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
167. Euphorbia saratoi Ard. (= E. virgultosa Klokov): Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges
FABACEAE
168. Caragana halodendron (Pall.) Dum.Cours. (= Halimodendron halodendron (Pall.) Voss.): Erg. CA, N113-00044. – N. r.:
AsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Chamaephyte. – Hab.: Deserts. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, River Ili valley
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870535
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384253
169. Coronilla varia L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
170. Gleditsia triacanthos L.: Erg. non CA (ergasiolypophyte). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873446
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100876901
171. Medicago falcata L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
172. Medicago lupulina L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (N). – L. f.: Annual, biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
173. Medicago × varia Martyn (= M. falcata × M. sativa L.): Escaped (spontaneous hybrid). – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Perennial;
Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
174. Melilotus albus Medik.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Sands
175. Robinia pseudoacacia L.: Erg. non CA (ergasiolypophyte) . – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
176. Trifolium pratense L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
177. Vicia grandiflora Scop.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs-step (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875713
178. Vicia sativa L. subsp. nigra (L.) Ehrh. (= V. angustifolia L.): Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte.
– Hab.: Synanthropic
179. Vicia sepium L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
GERANIACEAE
180. Erodium cicutarium (L.) L’Her.: Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
181. Geranium divaricatum Erhr: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875712
182. Geranium pusillum L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557336
183. Geranium robertianum L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384255
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867976
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557334
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181446
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870535
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384253
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873446
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/100876901
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875713
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875712
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91557336
30 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
HYDRANGEACEAE
184. Philadelphus incanus Koehne: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AsE (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
JUGLANDACEAE
185. Juglans regia L.: Erg. CA, N113-00048. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges. –
Intr.: 1965, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag
LAMIACEAE
186. Ajuga genevensis L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cauc (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
187. Ballota nigra L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMedE (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
188. Glechoma hederacea L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
189. Lamium maculatum (L.) L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/65532253
190. Lamium purpureum L.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (N). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
191. Leonurus quinquelobatus Gilib.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsC (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
192. Nepeta grandiflora M. Bieb.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte.
– Hab.: Meadows
193. Prunella vulgaris L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
194. Stachys annua (L.) L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
MALVACEAE
195. Alcea nudiflora (Lindl.) Boiss.: Erg. CA, N113-00019. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.:
Steppes. – Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, former settlement Archabil (Firuza)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874165
196. Alcea rugosa Alef.: Escaped (from the plot “Crimea”). – N. r.: EuAs-step (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. –
Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180108
197. Malva neglecta Wallr.: Xen. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
198. Malva sylvestris L.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
199. Malva thuringiaca (L.) Vis. (= Lavatera thuringiaca L.): Native. – N. r.: EuAsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. –
Hab.: Steppes
MORACEAE
200. Morus alba L.: Escaped (from tree and fruit plantations). – N. r.: AsE (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs
and edges
NYCTAGINACEAE
201. Mirabilis nyctaginea (Michx.) MacMill.: Escaped. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
OLEACEAE
202. Forsythia suspensa (Thunb.) Vahl (= F. fortunei Lindl.): Erg. non CA (ergasiolipophyte). – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Shrub;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870533
203. Fraxinus excelsior L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cauc (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875681
204. Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
205. Fraxinus sogdiana Bunge: Erg. CA, N113-00042. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.:
1961,1962, Uzbekistan, Tashkent Botanical Garden
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875685
206. Ligustrum vulgare L.: Escaped. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/99546046
207. Syringa chinensis Willd.: Erg. non CA. – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
208. Syringa vulgaris L.: Erg. non CA (ergasiolipophyte). – N. r.: Med (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs
and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875706
ONAGRACEAE
209. Epilobium angustifolium L. (= Chamerion angustifolium (L.) Holub): Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Perennial;
Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/65532253
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874165
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180108
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870533
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875681
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875685
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/99546046
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875706
Plant Introduction • 95/96 31
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
OXALIDACEAE
210. Oxalis stricta L.: Xen. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
PAPAVERACEAE
211. Chelidonium majus L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/68278200
212. Corydalis caucasica DC.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Cauc (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102012808
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870536
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870542
213. Corydalis solida (L.) Clairv.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/75513101
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57551020
214. Fumaria schleicheri Soy.-Willem.: Xen. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
215. Papaver dubium L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
216. Papaver rhoeas L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
PLANTAGINACEAE
217. Linaria vulgaris Mill.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
218. Plantago lanceolata L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
219. Plantago major L.: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
220. Veronica arvensis L.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
221. Veronica chamaedrys L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
222. Veronica hederifolia L.: Xen. – N. r.: EuW-subMed (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
223. Veronica polita Fr.: Xen. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
224. Veronica sublobata M. Fischer: Native. – N. r.: EuW (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
POLYGONACEAE
225. Fallopia convolvulus (L.) A. Love: Xen. – N. r.: As (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
226. Fallopia dumetorum (L.) Holub: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
227. Persicaria amphibia (L.) Delarbre: Native. – N. r.: Hol (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Wetlands
228. Polygonum arenastrum Boreau: Native. – N. r.: PArct (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
229. Polygonum aviculare L. subsp. aviculare: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
230. Polygonum aviculare subsp. neglectum (Besser) Arcang. (= P. neglectum Besser): Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.:
Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
231. Rumex patientia L. subsp. patientia: Escaped. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
232. Rumex patientia subsp. pamiricus (Rech.f.) Rech. f. (= R. pamiricus Rech.): Erg. CA, N113-00078. – N. r.: AsC (Y). –
L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/122801299
233. Rumex thyrsiflorus Fingerh.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876899
234. Rumex tianschanicus Losinsk.: Erg. CA, N113-00079. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.:
Meadows. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875702
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873440
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870539
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867982
PRIMULACEAE
235. Lysimachia nummularia L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cau (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
RANUNCULACEAE
236. Anemone ranunculoides (L.) Holub: Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cau (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
237. Clematis vitalba L.: Escaped (from the plot “Lianas”). – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.: Liana; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101750950
238. Helleborus orientalis Lam. (= H. caucasicus A. Braun): Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.:
Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91286776
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/68278200
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102012808
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870536
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870542
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/75513101
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57551020
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/122801299
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876899
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875702
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873440
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870539
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867982
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101750950
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91286776
32 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
239. Ranunculus ficaria L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
240. Ranunculus illyricus L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs-step (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
241. Ranunculus polyanthemos L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
RHAMNACEAE
242. Rhamnus cathartica L.: Erg. CA, N113-00070. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
ROSACEAE
243. Agrimonia eupatoria L.: Erg. CA, N113-00018. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1961, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, former settlement Archabil (Firuza)
244. Cotoneaster neoantoninae A.N. Vassiljeva: Erg. CA, N113-00034. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. –
Hab.: Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867983
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95891917
245. Crataegus cf. ambigua C.A. Mey. ex A.K. Becker (= C. sororia C.A.Mey. ex Pojark.): Erg. CA, N113-00150. – N. r.: EuE-
subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
246. Crataegus dsungarica Zabel ex Lange (= C. almaatensis Pojark. ): Erg. CA, N113-00036. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91670642
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95183075
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93273153
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278352
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57558761
247. Crataegus × kyrtostyla Fingerh. (= C. monogyna × C. rhipidophylla): Native. – N. r.: Eu (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte.
– Hab.: Shrubs and edges
248. Crataegus monogyna (= C. leiomonogyna Klokov): Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges
248b. C. monogyna aggr. / Crataegus lipskyi Klokov: Native. – N. r.: EuC (N)
249. Crataegus pseudoheterophylla Pojark. subsp. turcomanica (Pojark.) K.I. Chr. (= C. turcomanica Pojark.): Erg. CA,
N113-00154. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181445
250. Crataegus rhipidophylla Gand.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384610
251. Crataegus submollis Sarg.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278357
252. Crataegus turkestanica Pojark.: Erg. CA, N113-00037. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1956, Turkmenistan, Kopet Dag, former settlement Archabil (Firuza)
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384261
253. Crataegus × zangezura nothosubsp. pseudoambigua (Pojark.) K.I. Chr. (= C. × pseudoambigua Pojark.): Erg. CA, N113-
00149. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384260
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93577264
254. Cydonia oblonga Mill.: Erg. CA, N113-00157. – N. r.: AsW (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1965,
Uzbekistan, Surxondaryo Region, the outskirts of Sina kishlak
255. Fragaria viridis Weston: Erg. CA, N113-00041. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.:
Steppes. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
256. Geum urbanum L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
257. Malus domestica Borkh.: Escaped. – Cultig. (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
258. Malus niedzwetzkyana Dieck: Erg. CA, N113-00059. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. –
Intr.: 1958, Western Tian Shan
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872696
259. Malus sieversii (Ledeb.) Roem.: Erg. CA, N113-00060. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. –
Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ili Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867978
260. Malus sieversii var. kirghisorum (Al. Fed. & Fed.) Ponomar. (= M. kirghisorum Al.Fed. & Fed.): Erg. CA, N113-00205.
– N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
261. Potentilla argentea L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95260102
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867983
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95891917
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/91670642
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95183075
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93273153
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278352
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57558761
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181445
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384610
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93278357
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384261
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384260
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/93577264
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872696
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867978
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95260102
Plant Introduction • 95/96 33
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
262. Potentilla inclinata Vill.: Native. – N. r.: EuN (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180102
263. Potentilla reptans L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Meadows
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95893095
264. Prunus armeniaca L..: Erg. CA, N113-00020. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges.
– Intr.: 1965, Kyrgyzstan, Fergana Range
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102592943
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875698
265. Prunus cerasifera Ehrh.: Erg. CA, N113-00069. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic. –
Intr.: 1952, Western Tian Shan
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874170
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867974
265b. Prunus cerasifera aggr. / P. sogdiana Vassilcz.: Erg. CA, N113-00068. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte.
– Hab.: Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1958, Western Tian Shan
266. Prunus cerasus L.: Erg. non CA. – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
267. Prunus mahaleb L.: Erg. CA, N113-00030. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Stony. – Intr.: 1961,
Western Tian Shan, Qurama Mountains
268. Prunus padus L.: Erg. CA, N113-00061. – N. r.: EuAs (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1958, Terskey Ala-too
269. Prunus tomentosa Thunb.: Erg. non CA. – N. r.: AsSE (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875687
270. Pyrus communis L. subsp. communis (= P. pyraster (L.) Burgsd.): Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873448
271. Rosa canina L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
272. Rosa corymbifera Borkh.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
272b. R. corymbifera aggr. / Rosa uncinella Besser (= R. corymbifera var. uncinella (Besser) J. Keller): . – N. r.: EuAs-
step (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Steppes
273. Rosa dumalis Bechst.: Native. – N. r.: EuW (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
274. Rosa spinosissima L.: Erg. CA, N113-00076. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Stony. – Intr.:
1961, Kazakhstan, Dzungarian Alatau
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872697
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384249
275. Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle: Erg. CA, N113-00252. – N. r.: AsC-Him (Y). – L. f.: Subhrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180110
276. Rubus caesius L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Subhrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
RUBIACEAE
277. Rubia tinctorum L. (= R. iberica (Fisch. Ex DC.) C Koch.): Erg. CA, N113-00077. – N. r.: subMed-AsC (Y). – L. f.:
Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1962, Kazakhstan, Almaty region
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875715
SALICACEAE
278. Populus × canescens (Aiton) Sm. (= P. alba L. × P. tremula L.): Erg. CA, N113-00067. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Tree;
Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests. – Intr.: 1956, Uzbekistan, Tashkent Botanical Garden. – Note. It was introduced and
planted under the name P. alba.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867981
279. Salix alba L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869610
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180100
280. Salix caspica Pall.: Erg. CA, N113-00080. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges. –
Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, River Ili valley
SANTALACEAE
281. Viscum album L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Subhrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867971
SCROPHULARIACEAE
282. Verbascum lychnitis L.: Native. – N. r.: PArctW (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Sands
283. Verbascum phlomoides L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Biennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Sands
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180102
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95893095
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102592943
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875698
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874170
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867974
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875687
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873448
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872697
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95384249
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180110
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875715
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867981
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869610
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180100
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867971
34 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
SOLANACEAE
284. Lycium barbarum L.: Erg. non CA (ergasiolipophyte). – N. r.: AsE (N). – L. f.: Subhrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94131462
285. Solanum lycopersicum L.: Escaped. – N. r.: AmC (N). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874164
286. Solanum nigrum L. s.l.: Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
STAPHYLEACEAE
287. Staphylea pinnata L.: Escaped (from the plot “Caucasus”). – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. –
Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873441
TAMARICACEAE
288. Tamarix cf. aralensis Bunge (= T. bungei Boiss.): Erg. CA, N113-00271. – N. r.: AsC (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte.
– Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104333224
289. Tamarix cf. hohenackeri Bunge: Erg. CA, N113-00272. – N. r.: EuAs-des (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1958, Uzbekistan, Tashkent Botanical Garden – Note. Our plants have semi-open flowers,
while typical T. hohenackeri plants in Central Asia have open flowers (Rusanov, 1949). It is quite probable that a hybrid
of T. hohenackeri × T. meyeri Boiss. ‘Mayskij Sneg’ grows on the site.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104332744
290. Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb.: Erg. CA, N113-00087. – N. r.: EuAs-des (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.:
Shrubs and edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, River Ili valley. – Note. There are two forms of this species in the
collection.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104285486
291. Tamarix szovitsiana Bunge: Erg. CA, N113-00086. – N. r.: AsW (Y). – L. f.: Shrub; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and
edges. – Intr.: 1961, Kazakhstan, River Ili valley – Note. The most numerous in the collection; in previous inventory
lists, this species was probably named T. arceuthoides Bunge (Kokhno, 1997). We have repeatedly tried to identify
these plants and now refer to them as T. szovitsiana. This may not be the final solution, but most of the features of the
plants in the plot correspond exactly to the descriptions of T. szovitsiana (Rusanov, 1949; Baum, 1978). Apparently, this
group of tamarisks is not well studied in nature. For example, Rusanov first indicated T. szovitsiana for Central Asia
(Rusanov, 1949), but Goloskokov (1963: 178-179) later concludet that T. litvinovii Gorschk. grows in this region instead
of T. szovitsiana. Baum (1978) indicated for Central Asia both of these species, but considered T. szovitsiana to be more
common.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104333221
TILIACEAE
292. Tilia cordata Mill.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-Cau (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
293. Tilia × europaea L. (= T. cordata × T. platyphyllos Scop.): Escaped (from tree plantations, spontaneous hybrid). –
N. r.: EuC (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
ULMACEAE
294. Ulmus glabra Huds.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
295. Ulmus laevis Pall.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (N). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875684
296. Ulmus minor Mill.: Erg. CA, N113-00288. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876895
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872700
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94188800
297. Ulmus pumila L.: Erg. CA, N113-00094. – N. r.: AsE (Y). – L. f.: Tree; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181437
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180112
URTICACEAE
298. Parietaria officinalis L.: Escaped (from the former plot “System of Higher Plants”). – N. r.: subMed (N). – L. f.:
Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/60496700
299. Urtica dioica L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Cryptophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101448449
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94131462
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101874164
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101873441
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104333224
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104332744
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104285486
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/104333221
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101875684
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101876895
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101872700
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94188800
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181437
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95180112
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/60496700
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101448449
Plant Introduction • 95/96 35
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
VIOLACEAE
300. Viola arvensis Murray: Xen. – N. r.: Med (Y). – L. f.: Annual; Therophyte. – Hab.: Synanthropic
301. Viola hirta L.: Native. – N. r.: EuAsW (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Shrubs and edges
302. Viola odorata L.: Native. – N. r.: Eu-subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869608
303. Viola odorata hybrid complex: Escaped (from flower beds). – Cultig. (N). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. –
Hab.: Shrubs and edges. – Note. Escaped ornamental cultivars, which are hybrids of V. odorata with V. alba Besser
and other species.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870540
304. Viola suavis M. Bieb.: Native. – N. r.: subMed (Y). – L. f.: Perennial; Hemicryptophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869609
305. Viola tricolor L. subsp. matutina (Klokov) Valentine: Native. – N. r.: EuE (N). – L. f.: Annual; Hemicryptophyte. –
Hab.: Synanthropic
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867973
VITACEAE
306. Parthenocissus vitacea (Knerr) Hitchc.: Escaped (from the plot “Lianas”). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Liana; Phanerophyte.
– Hab.: Forests
307. Vitis amurensis Rupr.: Escaped (from the plot “Far East”). – N. r.: FE (N). – L. f.: Liana; Phanerophyte. – Hab.: Forests
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181449
308. Vitis riparia Michx.: Escaped (from the plot “Lianas” or fruit plantation). – N. r.: AmN (N). – L. f.: Liana; Phanerophyte.
– Hab.: Shrubs and edges
Appendix B. Angular points of the plot “Central Asia” contours according to 2021 inventory.
Nr Side, name of the
neighboring territory
Coordinates (WGS 84)
1 West (from the plot
“Lianas”)
50.411831°, 30.558196°
2 50.411928°, 30.558480°
3 North-West (from the
plot of hermaphroditic
plants)
50.411642°, 30.559024°
4 50.411562°, 30.559261°
5 50.411519°, 30.559568°
6 50.411536°, 30.559827°
7 50.411621°, 30.560064°
8 50.411739°, 30.560248°
9 50.412123°, 30.560397°
10 North (from the plot
“Japanese Garden”)
50.412104°, 30.560546°
11 50.412048°, 30.560757°
12 50.411955°, 30.560964°
13 50.411776°, 30.561311°
14 50.411775°, 30.561589°
15 50.412041°, 30.561774°
16 North-East (from the
plot “Altai”)
50.412139°, 30.561931°
17 50.412229°, 30.562304°
18 50.411992°, 30.562301°
19 50.411989°, 30.562826°
20 50.411668°, 30.562815°
21 50.411670°, 30.562926°
22 50.411644°, 30.562995°
Nr Side, name of the
neighboring territory
Coordinates (WGS 84)
23 50.411658°, 30.563236°
24 50.411588°, 30.563430°
25 East (from the seed
plot)
50.411480°, 30.563318°
26 50.411368°, 30.563261°
27 50.411105°, 30.563205°
28 50.410778°, 30.563122°
29 South-West (from the
plot “Caucasus”)
50.410888°, 30.562379°
30 50.410637°, 30.562004°
31 50.411034°, 30.561231°
32 South-West (from the
administrative yard)
50.411362°, 30.560519°
33 50.411234°, 30.560477°
34 50.411085°, 30.560265°
35 50.411030°, 30.560117°
36 50.410988°, 30.559939°
37 50.410972°, 30.559668°
38 50.410984°, 30.558943°
39 50.411252°, 30.558698°
40 50.411293°, 30.558745°
41 50.411430°, 30.558651°
42 50.411607°, 30.558287°
43 50.411835°, 30.558198°
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869608
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101870540
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101869609
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/101867973
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/95181449
36 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
Appendix C. Illustrations.
Figure C1. Geographical scheme of directed
introduction of plants from the region of Central
Asia to the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical
Garden.
Figure C2. Species of the genus Allium on the plot “Central Asia”: A – A. aflatunense; B – A. altissimum;
C – A. caeruleum var. bulbiferum; D – A. caeruleum var. caeruleum; E – A. christophii; F – A. decipiens.
A B
C D
E F
Plant Introduction • 95/96 37
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
Figure C2. Continued. Species of the genus Allium on the plot “Central Asia”: G – A. fetisowii; H – A. nutans;
I – A. rosenbachianum; J – A. schoenoprasum; K – A. stipitatum; L – A. tuberosum; M, N – full-fledged introductory
populations of A. altissimum and A. christophii.
G H
I J
K L
M N
38 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
A B
C D
E F
G H
Figure C3. Representatives of the genus Crataegus on the plot “Central Asia”: A, B – C. dsungarica;
C – C. monogyna (native plant); D – C. submollis (from North America); E – C. pseudoheterophylla subsp.
turkestanica; F – C. pseudoheterophylla subsp. turcomanica; G, H – C. × zangezura subsp. pseudoambigua.
Plant Introduction • 95/96 39
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
Figure C4. Species of the genus Tamarix on the plot “Central Asia”: A – T. cf. aralensis; B – T. hohenackeri
complex; C, D – forms of T. ramosissima; E, F, G – T. szovitsiana; H – T. hohenackeri complex.
A B
C D
E F
G H
40 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
A B
C D
E F
G H
Figure C5. Species of the genus Tulipa on the plot “Central Asia”: A – T. bifloriformis; B – T. fosteriana;
C – T. kaufmanniana; D – T. praestans; E – T. sprengeri; F – T. suaveolens; G – T. undulatifolia var. micheliana;
H – T. urumiensis.
Plant Introduction • 95/96 41
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
A B
C D
E F
G H
Figure C6. Habitats and introductory tulip populations on plot “Central Asia”: A, B – T. bifloriformis;
C, D – T. fosteriana; E – T. kaufmanniana; F, G – T. praestans; H – T. urumiensis.
42 Plant Introduction • 95/96
O. Shynder, J. Negrash
A B
C D
E F
G H
Figure C7. Synanthropic and invasive organisms and escaped plants beyond the places of cultivation on
the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia”. Synanthropic animal: A – Canis lupus subsp. familiaris. Invasive
plants: B – Lonicera ruprechtiana; C – Corydalis caucasica; D – Clematis vitalba, E – Vitis riparia. Escaped plants
from the plot “Caucasus”: F – Arum elongatum; G – Galanthus woronowii; H – Taxus baccata.
Plant Introduction • 95/96 43
Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko Botanical Garden
Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному
саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України
Олександр Шиндер *, Юлія Неграш
Національний ботанічний сад імені М.М. Гришка НАН України, вул. Тімірязєвська, 1, Київ, 01014,
* shinderoleksandr@gmail.com
Вперше було проведено повну інвентаризацію та аналіз таксономічного складу видів флори на
фітогеографічній ділянці “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН
України. Ділянку було створено у 1953 р. з метою спрямованої інтродукції та натуралізації рослин
із країн Середньої Азії до Києва. За весь час тут було випробувано понад 1000 видів рослин, що
свідчить про великий обсяг експериментальної роботи. За результатами інвентаризації нині на
ділянці зафіксовано 308 валідних таксонів (видів і підвидів) вищих судинних рослин зі 168 родів і
66 родин. З них 183 таксони належить до природної флори Середньої Азії. Структура флори рослин
на дослідженій ділянці має певні риси флори країн Середньої Азії. Але в умовах Києва найкраще
прижилися ті рослини середньоазійської флори, які пристосовані до зростання в помірно-
кліматичних умовах (північні степи, придолинні і низькогірні ліси). У географічній структурі флори
ділянки переважають ергазіофіти з середньоазійським (25,0 %), євразійським і палеоарктичним
(разом 34,2 %) і субсередземноморським (10,9 %) типами ареалів. 42 види ергазіофітів є ендемами
Середньої Азії. У біоморфологічній структурі флори ділянки переважають багаторічники (47,3 %), а
частка дерев’янистих рослин становить 26,4 %. За класифікацією життєвих форм Раункієра на ділянці
переважають гемікриптофіти (28,4 %), а також високими є частки фанерофітів і криптофітів (по 25,1 %).
В умовах Києва саме фанерофіти із гірських регіонів виявилися найбільш стійкими рослинами. Серед
ергазіофітів середньоазійського походження найбільше представлено рослини, які ростуть у лісах,
степах, чагарниках та на узліссях. Серед ергазіофітів, які ростуть на ділянці “Середня Азія” є 24 pідкісні
види, що внесені червоних книг різних країн Центральної Азії. В нинішній час накопичилися деякі
проблеми, які стосуються стану фітоценозів на фітогеографічній ділянці “Середня Азія” та її флори
в цілому. Зокрема спостерігається загибель багатьох ергазіофітів середньоазіатського походження
через невідповідність кліматичних умов, експансія інвазійних організмів, зростаюче антропогенне
навантаження тощо. Але завдяки великим масштабам інтродукційних робіт по створенню цієї
ділянки, її колекція живих рослин має унікальний склад і залишається однією із головних прикрас
Національного ботанічного саду імені М.М. Гришка.
Ключові слова: інтродукція, місцеві рослини, структура флори, рідкісні види, чужорідні види
|
| id | oai:ojs2.plantintroduction.org:article-1616 |
| institution | Plant Introduction |
| keywords_txt_mv | keywords |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-07-17T12:54:09Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine |
| record_format | ojs |
| resource_txt_mv | wwwplantintroductionorg/22/18178f90d1a7adcf31ef0e98543ecf22.pdf |
| spelling | oai:ojs2.plantintroduction.org:article-16162023-08-26T20:38:45Z Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України Shynder, Oleksandr Negrash, Julia For the first time, a complete inventory and analysis of the taxonomic composition of the flora of the phytogeographic plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine were conducted. The plot “Central Asia” was established in 1953 for the directed introduction and naturalization of plants from Central Asia. Over 1,000 plant species have been tested here during all this time, which indicates a large amount of experimental work. According to the inventory results, 308 valid taxa (species and subspecies) of higher vascular plants from 168 genera and 66 families have been recorded on the plot. Of these, 183 taxa belong to the natural flora of Central Asia. The structure of the flora on the study plot has certain features of the flora of Central Asia. However, in the conditions of Kyiv, the plants of Central Asian flora requiring more temperate habitats (e.g., plants originated from northern steppes, valley and lowland forests) have taken root best. The geographical structure of the flora of the plot is dominated by ergasiophytes with Central Asian (25.0 %), Eurasian and Paleoarctic (together 34.2 %), and sub-Mediterranean (10.9 %) types of ranges. From this number, 42 species of ergasiophytes are endemic to Central Asia. The biomorphological structure of the flora of the plot is dominated by perennials (47.3 %), and the share of woody plants is 26.4 %. According to Raunkiaer’s classification of life forms, hemicryptophytes (28.4 %), phanerophytes and cryptophytes (25.1 % each) predominate on the plot. In the conditions of Kyiv, phanerophytes from mountainous regions appeared to be the most resistant plants. While among ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin, plants growing in forests, steppes, shrubs, and edges appeared the most represented. Among the ergasiophytes growing on the plot “Central Asia”, 24 species are listed in the red books of Central Asian countries. Currently, there are some problems related to the state of phytocoenoses on the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” and its flora in general (e.g., death of many ergasiophytes of Central Asian origin due to inconsistency of climatic conditions, expansion of invasive organisms, growing anthropogenic load, etc.) However, thanks to the large-scale introductory work, the collection of plants on the plot has a unique composition and remains one of the most attractive decorations of the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden. Вперше було проведено повну інвентаризацію та аналіз таксономічного складу видів флори на фітогеографічній ділянці “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М.&nbsp;Гришка НАН України. Ділянку було створено у 1953 р. з метою спрямованої інтродукції та натуралізації рослин із країн Середньої Азії до Києва. За весь час тут було випробувано понад 1000 видів рослин, що свідчить про великий обсяг експериментальної роботи. За результатами інвентаризації нині на ділянці зафіксовано 308 валідних таксонів (видів і підвидів) вищих судинних рослин зі 168 родів і 66 родин. З них 183 таксони належить до природної флори Середньої Азії. Структура флори рослин на дослідженій ділянці має певні риси флори країн Середньої Азії. Але в умовах Києва найкраще прижилися ті рослини середньоазійської флори, які пристосовані до зростання в помірно-кліматичних умовах (північні степи, придолинні і низькогірні ліси). У географічній структурі флори ділянки переважають ергазіофіти з середньоазійським (25,0 %), євразійським і палеоарктичним (разом 34,2 %) і субсередземноморським (10,9 %) типами ареалів. 42 види ергазіофітів є ендемами Середньої Азії. У біоморфологічній структурі флори ділянки переважають багаторічники (47,3 %), а частка дерев’янистих рослин становить 26,4 %. За класифікацією життєвих форм Раункієра на ділянці переважають гемікриптофіти (28,4 %), а також високими є частки фанерофітів і криптофітів (по 25,1 %). В умовах Києва саме фанерофіти із гірських регіонів виявилися найбільш стійкими рослинами. Серед ергазіофітів середньоазійського походження найбільше представлено рослини, які ростуть у лісах, степах, чагарниках та на узліссях. Серед ергазіофітів, які ростуть на ділянці “Середня Азія” є 24 pідкісні види, що внесені червоних книг різних країн Центральної Азії. В нинішній час накопичилися деякі проблеми, які стосуються стану фітоценозів на фітогеографічній ділянці “Середня Азія” та її флори в цілому. Зокрема спостерігається загибель багатьох ергазіофітів середньоазіатського походження через невідповідність кліматичних умов, експансія інвазійних організмів, зростаюче антропогенне навантаження тощо. Але завдяки великим масштабам інтродукційних робіт по створенню цієї ділянки, її колекція живих рослин має унікальний склад і залишається однією із головних прикрас Національного ботанічного саду імені М.М. Гришка. M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the NAS of Ukraine 2022-07-29 Article Article application/pdf https://www.plantintroduction.org/index.php/pi/article/view/1616 10.46341/PI2022010 Plant Introduction; No 95/96 (2022); 3-43 Інтродукція Рослин; № 95/96 (2022); 3-43 2663-290X 1605-6574 10.46341/PI95-96 en https://www.plantintroduction.org/index.php/pi/article/view/1616/1530 Copyright (c) 2022 Oleksandr Shynder, Julia Negrash http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
| spellingShingle | Shynder, Oleksandr Negrash, Julia Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title | Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title_alt | Flora of the phytogeographical plot “Central Asia” in the M.M. Gryshko National Botanical Garden of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| title_full | Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title_fullStr | Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title_full_unstemmed | Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title_short | Флора фітогеографічної ділянки “Середня Азія” у Національному ботанічному саду імені М.М. Гришка НАН України |
| title_sort | флора фітогеографічної ділянки “середня азія” у національному ботанічному саду імені м.м. гришка нан україни |
| url | https://www.plantintroduction.org/index.php/pi/article/view/1616 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shynderoleksandr floraofthephytogeographicalplotcentralasiainthemmgryshkonationalbotanicalgardenofthenationalacademyofsciencesofukraine AT negrashjulia floraofthephytogeographicalplotcentralasiainthemmgryshkonationalbotanicalgardenofthenationalacademyofsciencesofukraine AT shynderoleksandr florafítogeografíčnoídílânkiserednâazíâunacíonalʹnomubotaníčnomusaduímenímmgriškananukraíni AT negrashjulia florafítogeografíčnoídílânkiserednâazíâunacíonalʹnomubotaníčnomusaduímenímmgriškananukraíni |