Rescuing Valuable Arctic Vegetation Data for Biodiversity Models, Ecosystem Models and a Panarctic Vegetation Classification

133 and biodiversity. Ecosystem models and predictive models make up an important part of CBIO-NET’s activities. A wide variety of species distribution modeling tools are already available and can be applied to predict historical, present, and future vegetation and plant distributions. These data can help refine predictions of ecosystem change, such as gas exchange between tundra vegetation and the biosphere. New advances in these methods offer the possibility to incorporate information on biotic interactions (Wisz et al., 2013) and phylogeographic history (Espindola et al., 2012) to fill gaps in information about distributions over space and time. Addressing biodiversity questions in the Arctic is a challenging task, however, because the information on vegetation patterns, which is essential to quantify speciesenvironmental relationships and make ecosystem-level predictions, contains large gaps. The large body of vegetation plot data collected across the Arctic during the past century could provide a key missing link needed to derive predictive models of future distributions under different climatechange scenarios.

[1]  Brian Huntley,et al.  Arctic tundra and Polar Desert Ecosystems , 2005 .

[2]  Nick Spencer,et al.  SPECIAL FEATURE: ECOINFORMATICS Veg-X - an exchange standard for plot-based vegetation data , 2011 .

[3]  P. Taberlet,et al.  DNA from soil mirrors plant taxonomic and growth form diversity. , 2012, Molecular ecology.

[4]  H. Birks,et al.  Recent vegetation changes at the high‐latitude tree line ecotone are controlled by geomorphological disturbance, productivity and diversity , 2010 .

[5]  E. Maarel,et al.  The Braun-Blanquet Approach , 1978 .

[6]  J. Schaminée,et al.  TURBOVEG, a comprehensive data base management system for vegetation data , 2001 .

[7]  P. Taberlet,et al.  Genetic consequences of climate change for northern plants , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  Wim A. Ozinga,et al.  Use of the ecological information system SynBioSys for the analysis of large datasets , 2007 .

[9]  Donald A. Walker,et al.  The Circumpolar Arctic vegetation map , 2005 .

[10]  Christian Damgaard,et al.  Trend analyses of hierarchical pin-point cover data. , 2012, Ecology.

[11]  J. Oldeland,et al.  The Global Index of Vegetation-Plot Databases (GIVD): a new resource for vegetation science , 2011 .

[12]  Jaroslav Moravec,et al.  International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 3rd edition , 2000 .

[13]  N. Matveyeva,et al.  4 – Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation , 1992 .

[14]  Miquel De Cáceres,et al.  Towards consistency in vegetation classification , 2012 .

[15]  W. D. Kissling,et al.  The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling , 2012, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[16]  Don Faber-Langendoen,et al.  Contours of the Revised U.S. National Vegetation Classification Standard , 2009 .

[17]  Don Faber-Langendoen,et al.  VegBank – a permanent, open-access archive for vegetation-plot data , 2012 .

[18]  S. Talbot,et al.  Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop: Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Flora Group. Cir- cumboreal Vegetation Mapping (CBVM) Workshop, Helsinki, Finland, November 3-6th, 2008. , 2010 .

[19]  M. Luoto,et al.  Disregarding topographical heterogeneity biases species turnover assessments based on bioclimatic models , 2008 .

[20]  J. S. Rodwell,et al.  Vegetation-plot data and databases in Europe: an overview , 2008 .

[21]  L. Maiorano,et al.  Predicting present and future intra-specific genetic structure through niche hindcasting across 24 millennia. , 2012, Ecology Letters.

[22]  V. Razzhivin,et al.  Broad-scale vegetation-environment relationships in Eurasian high-latitude areas , 2006 .