<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Halada, Lubos</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Evans, Doug</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Romão, Carlos</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Petersen, Jan-Erik</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Which habitats of European importance depend on agricultural practices?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biodiversity and Conservation</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Agricultural management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Favourable conservation status</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Grazing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Habitats directive</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">High Nature Value Farmland</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mowing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Natura 2000</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ostermann list</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011///</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s10531-011-9989-z</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">20</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2365 - 2378</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The aim of this paper is to identify the habitat types listed in the Habitats Directive Annex I that require low-intensity agricultural management for their existence. We assessed the link between the Annex I habitat types and agricultural practices in order to identify habitat types that depend on the continuation of agricultural practices or whose existence is prolonged or spatially enlarged via blocking or reducing the secondary succession by agricultural activities. 63 habitat types that depend on or which can proﬁt from agricultural activities—mainly grazing and mowing—were identiﬁed. They are classiﬁed into 2 groups: (1) habitats fully dependent on the continuation of agricultural management; (2) habitats partly dependent on the continuation of agricultural management. This paper also brieﬂy discusses habitat types for which either doubts remain on their dependence on agricultural management, or the relation to extensive farming practices exists only in part of their area of distribution in Europe or under certain site conditions, respectively. Assessments of the conservation status of habitats of European Importance by 25 EU Member States in 2007 showed that habitats identiﬁed by us as depending on agricultural practices had a worse status than non-agricultural habitats.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bergmeier, Erwin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Petermann, Jörg</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schröder, Eckhard</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geobotanical survey of wood-pasture habitats in Europe: diversity, threats and conservation</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biodiversity and Conservation</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Agroforestry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dehesa</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Habitats directive</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hudewald</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pasture-woodland</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Silvopastoralism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Traditional land-use</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010///</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10531-010-9872-3http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s10531-010-9872-3</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2995 - 3014</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Agro-silvopastoral land-use has a long tradition throughout Europe. Depending on the region, wood-pasture occurs as vanishing relic of historical land-use, or still more or less widespread as multiple-use rangeland. A new development is that former intensively managed land is being left to evolve towards wood-pasture as an economically and ecologically favourable alternative. In a review of European wood-pasture habitats we distinguish 24 types based on the geobotanical criteria of region, structure, land-use and tree species composition. The European wood-pasture types may be classiﬁed as hemiboreal and boreal (4 types), nemoral old-growth (7), nemoral scrub and coppice (5), meridional old-growth (2), meridional scrub and coppice (4), and grazed orchards (2). Wood-pasture forms part of the cultural heritage of Europe, and may add signiﬁcantly to the preservation of regional biodiversity. The role of wood-pasture in ecological restoration planning and the possibilities of maintaining or enhancing features of wood-pasture deserve more recognition. Many wood-pastures suffer from regeneration failure and are over-mature. Other threats to wood-pasture include abandonment, intensiﬁcation, oak disease, overgrazing and clearance. In the European Union Habitats Directive, woodpasture habitats are represented but rather inconsistently. We suggest neglected woodpasture habitat types to be considered for inclusion. Wood-pasture may form an important element for the economic integrity of rural areas aiming to improve ecological quality‚ provided they are managed sustainably</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></issue></record></records></xml>