Apr 10, 2025
Phytoindication evaluation of ecological regimes
- Olexander Zhukov1,
- Olena Lisovets2,
- Serhiy Podorozhniy1,
- Hanna Tutova1,
- Olha Kunakh2
- 1Bogdan khmelnitsky melitopol state pedagogical university;
- 2Oles Honchar Dnipro National University
Protocol Citation: Olexander Zhukov, Olena Lisovets, Serhiy Podorozhniy, Hanna Tutova, Olha Kunakh 2025. Phytoindication evaluation of ecological regimes. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.4r3l264e3v1y/v1
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: April 09, 2025
Last Modified: April 10, 2025
Protocol Integer ID: 126443
Abstract
The calculation of environmental
parameters was conducted using phytoindication scales. The scale developed by
Didukh [1] enables ordination analysis based
on 12 factors: soil humidity (Hd), soil moisture variability (fH), soil
aeration (Ae), soil nitrogen content (Nt), soil acidity (Rc), salt regime (Sl),
carbonate content (Ca), temperature regime (Tm), ombroregime (Om), climate
continentality (Kn), cryoregime (Cr), and light intensity (Lc). The method offers a technique for converting phytoindication scales into measurable physical units
Phytoindication evaluation of ecological regimes
The calculation of environmental
parameters was conducted using phytoindication scales. The scale developed by
Didukh (Didukh, 2011) enables ordination analysis based
on 12 factors: soil humidity (Hd), soil moisture variability (fH), soil
aeration (Ae), soil nitrogen content (Nt), soil acidity (Rc), salt regime (Sl),
carbonate content (Ca), temperature regime (Tm), ombroregime (Om), climate
continentality (Kn), cryoregime (Cr), and light intensity (Lc).
The plant ecological
groups are categorised into 23 gradations based on their relationship to the
humidity regime (Didukh, 2011). The moisture regime scores can be
converted into phytoindication estimates of the productive moisture stock
within the one-meter soil layer, as outlined by Maslikova (2018a) and Molozhon et al. (2023):
where W represents the content of
productive moisture in the one-meter layer of soil (measured in millimetres),
and H indicates a score of the moisture regime. A productive moisture content
of less than 60 mm in a one-meter layer is classified as very low; a content
ranging from 60 to 90 mm is classified as low; a content between 90 and 130 mm
is deemed satisfactory; a content ranging from 130 to 160 mm is considered
good; and a content exceeding 160 mm is classified as very good for
agricultural plants (Vadunina &
Korchagina, 1986).
The plant ecological
groups were categorised into 12 gradations based on their relationship to the
soil moisture variability. These scores can be converted into the coefficient
of irregularity of soil moisture (ω), which ranges from 0 (indicating the
lowest level of contrast in moisture conditions, such as consistently moist or
consistently dry habitats) to 0.5 (indicating the highest level of contrast in
moisture conditions, where nearly complete water immersion is followed by
drought). The indicator scores of soil moisture variability can be converted to
the moisture irregularity coefficient as follows (Maslikova,
2018):
ω = 0.042fH – 0.032,
where ω is the coefficient of
irregularity of soil moisture, and fH is an indicator score of soil
moisture variability.
The plant ecological groups were categorised
into 15 gradations based on their relationship to the aeration regime. These
scores can be converted into the percentage of air-filled porosity relative to
the total porosity volume as follows (Maslikova,
2018):
where P represents the air-filled porosity percentage, which is
the percentage of the total volume of pore space in the soil, and Ae
denotes the score of the aeration regime.
The plant ecological
groups are categorised into 15 gradations based on their tolerance to soil
acidity. These scores can be converted to the pH of the soil aqueous solution
as follows (Maslikova,
2018c):
рН = 2.26ln
(Rc) + 1.88,
where pH is defined as the negative
logarithm of the concentration of hydrogen ions in the soil solution, while Rc
represents the acidity score.
The plant ecological groups are categorised
into 19 gradations based on their relationship to the overall salt regime.
These gradations can be converted into water-soluble salt content as follows (Maslikova,
2018c):
where S represents the salt content in the soil solution,
measured in micrograms per litre (μg/l), and Sl denotes the score of the
soil salinity regime.
The plant ecological groups were categorised
into 13 gradations based on their response to the carbonate content of the
soil. The scores can be converted to CaO + MgO content as follows (Maslikova,
Zhukov & Kovalenko, 2019):
where CaO+MgO is the carbonate content, expressed in terms of calcium
and magnesium oxides (%). Ca serves as a score for the carbonate
content.
The plant ecological
groups are categorized into 11 gradations based on their relationship to soil
nitrogen content. The scores can be converted to soil nitrogen content as
follows (Maslikova,
Zhukov & Kovalenko, 2019):
where N represents the soil's nitrogen content, measured in grams
per kilogram (g/kg), and Nt is a score that indicates the soil's trophic
regime.
The plant ecological
groups are categorised into 17 gradations based on their relationship to the
thermal regime. These scores can be translated into a radiation balance as
follows (Molozhon et
al., 2023):
RB = 0.21 Tm,
where RB is the radiation
balance measured in gJ m–2 year–1, while Tm represents
the thermal regime score, one must note that if the radiation balance is
expressed in Kcal cm–2 year–1, one can multiply the score
by 5.
The plant ecological
groups are classified into 23 categories based on their relationship to
atmospheric humidity regimes. Ombroclimate scores can be interpreted as the
difference in the amount of precipitation before evaporation from open water
surfaces, measured annually in terms of average days (Molozhon et
al., 2023):
Hum = 0.54 Om – 7,
where Hum represents the
difference between the average daily precipitation and the evaporation from the
open water surface over the same period, measured in millimetres (mm). Om
denotes the climate humidity score.
The plant ecological
groups are categorized into 17 gradations based on their relationship to
continentality. The continentality scores can be converted to the Ivanov
continentality scale (Ivanov, 1959) as follows (Molozhon et
al., 2023):
SKn = 10 Kn + 41,
where SKn represents the
Ivanov continentality scale, Kn denotes the score of the continentality
regime.
The plant ecological
groups are divided into 15 gradations based on their relationship to the
cryoclimate. The cryoclimate scores can be converted to reflect the average
temperature of the coldest month of the year as follows (Molozhon et
al., 2023):
Temp = 3.83 Cr –38.17,
where Temp represents the
average temperature of the coldest month of the year, measured in degrees
Celsius (°C), while Cr is a score that indicates the cryoclimate.
The relationship between
the measured light and the photoinduction assessment of light levels is as
follows:
log_Lighiting
= 0.22*L-value,
where log_Lighiting is the decimal logarithm of
the relative light level, L-value is the phytoindication assessment of
the light level according to the Ellenberg scale.
Protocol references
[1] Didukh,
Y.P., 2011, The ecological scales for the species of Ukrainian flora and their
use in synphytoindication. Kyiv, Phytosociocenter, Kyiv.
[2] Maslikova,
K.P., 2018, Phytoindication of spatial and temporal structures of technozems
and endogenous mechanisms of sustainable functioning of technogenic soil-like
bodies. Agrology 1, 273–280.
https://doi.org/10.32819/2617-6106.2018.13006
[3] Molozhon,
K.O., Lisovets, O.I., Kunakh, O.M. and Zhukov, O. V., 2023, The structure of
beta-diversity explains why the relevance of phytoindication increases under
the influence of park reconstruction. Regulatory Mechanisms in Biosystems14, 634–651. https://doi.org/10.15421/022392
[4] Vadunina,
A.F. and Korchagina, S.A., 1986, Metody issledovaniya fizicheskikh svoĭstv
pochv [Methods for research ofphysical properties of the soil]. Agropromizdat
(In Russian), Moskva.
[5] Maslikova,
K.P., 2018, Phytoindication assessment of the dynamics of the aeration regime
of technozems of the Nikopol manganese ore basin. Scientific Reports of
NULES of Ukraine 4, 1–14.
[6] Maslikova,
K.P., 2018, Spatial and temporal dynamics of phytoindication estimates of
acidity and salt regime of technozems of the Nikopol manganese ore basin. Agrobiology1, 115–128.