Spatio-Temporal Variability Description of the Rare Species Lilium martagon L. in Different Habitat Conditions
Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Statistical Analysis
- -
- Shannon index, Simpson index, Pielou index, number of species, soil moisture, soil pH, height of plant cover and light intensity at ground level, as well as values of Ellenberg indices among study sites;
- -
- Individual traits of immature stems of Lilium martagon (height, number of leaves in the whorl, and dimensions of the longest one) among populations in the years 2018–2023;
- -
- Individual traits of virginile stems (height, number of leaves in the lower whorl, and dimensions of the longest one) among populations in the years 2020–2023;
- -
- Individual traits of generative stems (height, number of flowers, number of whorls, number of leaves in the lowest whorl and dimensions of the longest one, number of spiral leaves, and dimensions of spiral leaf placed above the highest whorl) among populations in the years 2018–2023.
3. Results
3.1. Habitat Conditions
3.2. The Selected Weather Conditions in the Study Period
3.3. Spatio-Temporal Variability of Abundance and Structure of Developmental Stages of Populations
3.4. The Spatial Variability of Selected Individual Traits of Lilium martagon
3.5. The Temporal Variability of Selected Individual Traits of Lilium martagon
4. Discussion
4.1. Habitat Conditions
4.2. The Spatial and Temporal Variability of Abundance and Structure of Population Lilium martagon
4.3. Spatial Variability of Traits of Stems of Lilium martagon
4.4. The Temporal Variability of Traits of Stems of Lilium martagon
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
| Compared Study Sites | Shannon Index | Simpson Index | Pielou Index | Number of Species | Soil Moisture | Soil Reaction | Height of Plant Cover | Light Intensity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1–2 | −0.05 | 0.00 | −0.13 | 0.09 | −0.40 | 0.77 | −0.28 | −0.39 |
| 1–3 | −1.09 | −0.84 | −0.61 | −1.45 | −2.71 | 0.14 | −0.46 | −1.53 |
| 2–3 | −1.13 | −0.69 | −0.30 | −1.89 | −1.91 | −0.97 | −0.30 | −1.78 |
| Compared Study Sites | Light | Temperature | Continentalism | Moisture | Soil Reaction | Nitrogen Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1–2 | −0.39 | 1.60 | 1.41 | 0.66 | −1.38 | 0.39 |
| 1–3 | −1.53 | 0.32 | −0.18 | 0.67 | −0.76 | 0.35 |
| 2–3 | −1.78 | −1.33 | −1.92 | −0.13 | 0.22 | −0.09 |
| Year | Compared Populations | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Leaves in the Whorl | Length of the Longest Leaf in the Whorl [mm] | Width of the Longest Leaf in the Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1–2 | −0.1 | −0.56 | −0.09 | −0.04 |
| 1–3 | −0.57 | −0.67 | −0.29 | −0.14 | |
| 2–3 | −0.58 | −0.06 | −0.27 | −0.06 | |
| 2019 | 1–2 | 0.70 | 0.59 | 1.22 | 0.35 |
| 1–3 | −0.13 | 0.10 | 0.72 | 0.20 | |
| 2–3 | −0.90 | −0.58 | −0.66 | −0.16 | |
| 2020 | 1–2 | −0.06 | −0.37 | −0.005 | 0.002 |
| 1–3 | −0.28 | −0.73 | 0.16 | −0.39 | |
| 2–3 | −0.23 | −0.27 | 0.19 | −0.44 | |
| 2021 | 1–2 | −0.40 | −0.50 | −0.38 | −0.27 |
| 1–3 | −0.19 | −0.72 | 0.21 | 0.17 | |
| 2–3 | 0.27 | −0.28 | 0.76 | 0.69 | |
| 2022 | 1–2 | −0.50 | −0.10 | −0.17 | −0.70 |
| 1–3 | −0.52 | −0.31 | −0.08 | −0.05 | |
| 2–3 | 0.003 | −0.14 | 0.11 | 0.59 | |
| 2023 | 1–2 | −0.65 | −0.25 | −0.23 | −0.64 |
| 1–3 | −0.90 | −0.56 | 0.53 | 0.27 | |
| 2–3 | −0.19 | −0.28 | 0.92 | 0.32 |
| Year | Compared Populations | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Leaves in the Lower Whorl | Length of Leaves in the Lower Whorl [mm] | Width of Leaves in the Lower Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1–2 | −0.36 | −0.27 | −0.62 | −0.64 |
| 2019 | 1–3 | −1.34 | −0.65 | −0.59 | −0.06 |
| 2020 | 1–2 | −0.83 | −0.05 | 0.06 | −0.81 |
| 1–3 | −0.94 | −0.71 | 0.05 | 0.03 | |
| 2–3 | −7.08 | −6.17 | −9.17 | −6.70 | |
| 2021 | 1–2 | −0.03 | 0.04 | 0.16 | −0.32 |
| 1–3 | −0.86 | −1.19 | 0.95 | −0.19 | |
| 2–3 | −0.79 | −1.60 | 0.84 | 0.11 | |
| 2022 | 1–2 | −0.56 | −0.66 | 0.07 | −0.65 |
| 1–3 | −0.63 | −0.86 | 0.44 | 0.04 | |
| 2–3 | −0.11 | −0.37 | 0.36 | 0.72 | |
| 2023 | 1–2 | −0.68 | −1.13 | 0.20 | −0.86 |
| 1–3 | −0.95 | −1.17 | 0.24 | 0.25 | |
| 2–3 | 0.44 | 0.26 | −0.07 | −1.14 |
| Year | Compared Populations | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Flowers | Number of Whorls |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1–2 | 0.49 | 0.30 | 0.63 |
| 1–3 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.61 | |
| 2–3 | −0.31 | −0.24 | −0.02 | |
| 2019 | 1–2 | 0.66 | 0.47 | 0.40 |
| 1–3 | 0.03 | 0.16 | 0.35 | |
| 2–3 | −0.33 | −0.25 | −0.05 | |
| 2020 | 1–2 | 0.20 | 0.14 | −0.26 |
| 1–3 | −0.22 | −0.33 | −0.49 | |
| 2–3 | −5.49 | −2.32 | −3.62 | |
| 2021 | 1–2 | −0.02 | 0.21 | −0.32 |
| 1–3 | −0.37 | −0.06 | −0.09 | |
| 2–3 | −0.41 | −0.30 | 0.23 | |
| 2022 | 1–2 | 0.54 | −0.68 | −0.16 |
| 1–3 | 0.00 | −1.26 | −0.35 | |
| 2–3 | −0.32 | −0.64 | −0.26 | |
| 2023 | 1–2 | 0.11 | −0.05 | −0.03 |
| 1–3 | −0.99 | −0.79 | −0.34 | |
| 2–3 | 1.03 | 0.70 | 0.34 |
| Year | Compared Populations | Number of Leaves in the Lowest Whorl | Length of the Longest Leaf in the Lowest Whorl [mm] | Width of the Longest Leaf in the Lowest Whorl [mm] | Number of Spiral Leaves | Length of Spiral Leaf Above the Highest Whorl [mm] | Width of the Spiral Leaf Above the Highest Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1–2 | −0.30 | 0.41 | −0.30 | 0.47 | 0.30 | 0.07 |
| 1–3 | −0.72 | 0.27 | −0.30 | 0.52 | 0.33 | 0.17 | |
| 2–3 | −0.44 | −0.08 | −0.01 | −0.02 | 0.00 | 0.09 | |
| 2019 | 1–2 | −0.23 | 0.18 | −0.30 | 1.06 | 0.47 | 0.17 |
| 1–3 | −0.67 | 0.12 | −0.21 | 0.60 | 0.64 | 0.73 | |
| 2–3 | −0.20 | −0.02 | 0.02 | −0.18 | 0.05 | 0.23 | |
| 2020 | 1–2 | −0.42 | 0.29 | −0.13 | 1.40 | 0.73 | 0.54 |
| 1–3 | −0.83 | 0.04 | −0.16 | 1.25 | 0.72 | 0.35 | |
| 2–3 | −4.72 | −8.48 | −3.89 | −2.85 | −4.57 | −1.63 | |
| 2021 | 1–2 | −0.43 | −0.03 | −0.50 | 0.64 | 0.27 | 0.17 |
| 1–3 | −0.78 | 0.43 | 0.00 | 0.45 | 0.52 | 0.39 | |
| 2–3 | −0.34 | 0.56 | 0.46 | −0.20 | 0.41 | 0.35 | |
| 2022 | 1–2 | −0.35 | 0.07 | −0.19 | 1.71 | 0.74 | 0.56 |
| 1–3 | −0.69 | 0.40 | 0.25 | 1.00 | 1.30 | 1.24 | |
| 2–3 | −0.38 | 0.34 | 0.51 | −0.17 | 0.35 | 0.37 | |
| 2023 | 1–2 | −0.82 | −0.11 | −0.42 | −0.29 | 0.18 | 0.11 |
| 1–3 | −0.81 | 0.04 | −0.10 | −0.28 | 0.35 | 0.34 | |
| 2–3 | −0.02 | −0.23 | −0.60 | 0.01 | −0.16 | −0.24 |
References
- Zhou, J.; An, R.; Huang, X. Genus Lilium: A review on traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology. J. Etnopharmacol. 2021, 270, 113852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, N.; Miao, K.; Liu, C.; Jia, L.; Hu, J.; Huang, J.; Ji, Y. Historical biogeography and evolutionary diversification of Lilium (Liliaceae): New insights from plastome phylogenomics. Plant Divers. 2024, 46, 219–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornaris, A.; Chiavazza, P.M.; Devecchi, M. The importance of lilium in garden design: History and future. Acta Hortic. 2011, 900, 59–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Sochacki, D.; Marciniak, P. Breeding Aspects of Selected Ornamental Bulbous Crops. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P.; Shahin, A.; Marasek-Ciołakowska, A.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Kim, H.T.; Lim, K.-B. Lilium. In Ornamental Crops, Handbook of Plant Breeding; Van Huylenbroeck, J., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 481–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piękoś-Mirkowa, H.; Mirek, Z. Flora Polski. Atlas Roślin Chronionych; Multico Oficyna Wydawnicza: Warszawa, Poland, 2003; pp. 1–584. [Google Scholar]
- Zarzycki, K.; Trzcińska-Tacik, H.; Różański, W.; Szeląg, Z.; Wołek, J.; Korzeniak, U. Ecological Indicator Values of Vascular Plants of Poland. In Biodiversity of Poland; Mirek, Z., Ed.; W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences: Krakow, Poland, 2002; Volume 2, pp. 1–183. [Google Scholar]
- Chytrý, M.; Tichý, L.; Dřevojan, P.; Sádlo, J.; Zelený, D. Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. Preslia 2018, 90, 83–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meusel, H.; Jäger, E.; Rauschert, S.; Weinert, E. Vergleichende Chorologie der Zentraleuropäischen Flora; Gustav Fischer Verlag: Jena, Germany, 1978; Volume 2, pp. 1–258. [Google Scholar]
- Balode, A. Variabilityof wild Martagon Lily (Lilium martagon L.) in the region of Kurzeme. In Proceedings of the Research for Rural Development 2007 International Scientific Conference Proceedings, Jelgava, Latvia, 16–18 May 2007; Latvia University of Agriculture: Jelgava, Latvia, 2007; pp. 50–56. [Google Scholar]
- Pelkonen, V.-P.; Pairttilä, A.-M. Taxonomy and phylogeny of the genus Lilium. Floric. Ornam. Biotechnol. 2012, 6, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Global Biodiversity Information Facility Online. Lilium martagon L. 2025. Available online: https://www.gbif.org/pl/species/2753146 (accessed on 29 July 2025).
- Zając, A.; Zając, M. Distribution Atlas of Vascular Plants in Poland; Pracownia Chorologii Komputerowej Instytutu Botaniki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Cracow, Poland, 2001; pp. 1–332. [Google Scholar]
- Kozłowska, A. The forest communities in the Przemyśl Foothills, south-east Poland. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. 2000, 45, 345–372. [Google Scholar]
- Jędrzejko, K.; Walusiak, E. Charakterystyka florystyczno-fitosocjologiczna unikatowego stanowiska rzadkich i chronionych roślin naczyniowych w Lanckoronie (Pogórze Wielickie). Fragm. Flor. Geobot. Pol. 2008, 15, 239–251. [Google Scholar]
- Urbaniec, M.; Bach, A. Charakterystyka ekologiczna populacji lilii złotogłów (Lilium martagon L.) na północnym stoku Babiej Góry. Zesz. Probl. Post. Nauk Roln. 2010, 551, 399–405. [Google Scholar]
- Smoczyk, M. Rzadkie i zagrożone rośliny naczyniowe Pogórza Orlickiego (Sudety Środkowe)—Część 1. Przyr. Sudet. 2010, 13, 53–70. [Google Scholar]
- Paszkiewicz-Jasińska, A. Chronione i rzadkie gatunki roślin użytków zielonych w Sudetach. Inżynieria I Ochr. Sr. 2015, 18, 259–270. [Google Scholar]
- Pielech, R. Formalised classification and environmental controls of riparian forest communities in the Sudetes (SW Poland). Tuexenia 2015, 35, 155–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wójcik, T.; Ziaja, M. Występowanie Lilium martagon L. w buczynie karpackiej Dentario glandulosae-Fagetum w rezerwacie Góra Chełm na Pogórzu Strzyżowskim (Karpaty Zachodnie). Park. Nar. I Rezerwaty Przyr. 2017, 36, 65–76. [Google Scholar]
- Wójcik, T.; Ziaja, M. Zróżnicowanie zbiorowisk leśnych obszaru Natura 2000 “Las Hrabeński” PLH 180039 na Pogórzu Bukowskim (Karpaty Zachodnie). Fragm. Flor. Geobot. Pol. 2020, 27, 409–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Świerkosz, K.; Reczyńska, K. Zbiorowiska roślinne rezerwatu przyrody “Nad Groblą” (Pogórze Kaczawskie, Sudety). Przyr. Sudet. 2022, 24, 49–70. [Google Scholar]
- Bednorz, A. Charakterystyka ekologiczna populacji lilii złotogłów (Lilium martagon L.) w leśnictwie Bieniszew koło Konina. Roczniki AR Pozn. Bot. 1999, 316, 19–27. [Google Scholar]
- Miciniak, E.; Zątek, W. Zmiana liczebności populacji lilii złotogłów (Lilium martagon L.) w Wielkopolskim Parku Narodowym. Rocz. AR Pozn. Bot. 1999, 316, 87–96. [Google Scholar]
- Matuszkiewicz, W. Przewodnik do Oznaczania Zbiorowisk Roślinnych Polski; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2005; pp. 1–537. [Google Scholar]
- Ujházyová, M.; Uyházy, K.; Chytry, M.; Willner, W.; Čiliak, M.; Máliš, F.; Slezák, M. Diversity of beech forest vegetation in the Eastern Alps, Bohemian Massif and the Western Carpathians. Preslia 2016, 88, 435–457. [Google Scholar]
- Dakskobler, I.; Rozman, A. Vegetation analysis of the subalpine beech forest on the upper forest line in the Julian Alps (NW Slovenia and NW Italy) and in the northern Dinaric Alps. Hacquetia 2021, 20, 373–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marinšek, A.; Šilc, U.; Čarni, A. Geographical and ecological differentiation of Fagus forest vegetation in SE Europe. Appl. Veg. Sci. 2013, 16, 131–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gazda, A.; Gazda, M. Wielkość osobników lilii złotogłów Lilium martagon na przykładzie populacji rosnącej na terenie użytku ekologicznego “as Krzyszkowicki” koło Krakowa. Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2010, 66, 376–383. [Google Scholar]
- Nowak, S.; Nowak, A. Carici remotae-Fraxinetum Koch 1926 ex Faber 1936 in Opole Silesia. Opole Sci. Soc. Nat. J. 2010, 43, 13–22. [Google Scholar]
- Vukelić, J.; Šapić, I.; Alegro, A.; Šegota, V.; Stankić, I.; Baričević, D. Phytocoenological analysis of grey alder (Alnus incana L.) forests in the Dinarides of Croatia and their relationship with affiliated communities. Tuexenia 2017, 37, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brzeg, A.; Wika, S. Świetlista dąbrowa Potentillo albae-Quercetum Libbert 1933 nom. invers. w środkowej części Wyżyny Krakowsko-Częstochowskiej. Badania Fizjogr. Ser. Bot. 2017, 65, 7–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kricsfalusy, V.V. Mountain grasslands of high conservation value in the Eastern Carpathians: Syntaxonomy, biodiversity, protection and management. Thaiszia–J. Bot. 2013, 23, 67–112. [Google Scholar]
- Diviaková, A.; Stašiov, S.; Pondelík, R.; Pätoprstý, V.; Novikmec, M. Environmental and Management Control over the Submontane Grassland Plant Communities in Central Slovakia. Diversity 2021, 13, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ravetto Enri, S.; Petrella, F.; Ungaro, F.; Zavattaro, L.; Mainetti, A.; Lombardi, G.; Lonati, M. Relative Importance of Plant Species Composition and Environmental Factors in Affecting Soil Carbon Stocks of Alpine Pastures (NW Italy). Agriculture 2021, 11, 1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sobisz, Z.; Truchan, M. Lilium martagon L. in former manor parks and Protestant cemeteries in the central part of Polish Pomerania. Biodiv. Res. Conserv. 2006, 3–4, 308–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sigiel-Dopierała, A.; Jagodziński, A.M. Materials to the vascular flora of the neglected evangelical cemeteries of the western part of the Drawsko Landscape Park (Poland). Botanika–Steciana 2011, 15, 57–64. [Google Scholar]
- Regulation of the Minister of Environment of 9th October 2014 Concerning Plant Species Protection (Polish). 2014. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=wdu20140001409 (accessed on 28 July 2025).
- Pliszko, A. Red list of vascular plants of the Western Suwałki Lakeland, north-eastern Poland. Acta Musei Silesiae Sci. Nat. 2017, 66, 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Żukowski, W.; Jackowiak, B. Lista roślin naczyniowych ginących i zagrożonych na Pomorzu Zachodnim i w Wielkopolsce. In Ginące i Zagrożone Rośliny Naczyniowe Pomorza Zachodniego i Wielkopolski; Prace Zakładu Taksonomii Roślin UAM w Poznaniu 3; Żukowski, W., Jackowiak, B., Eds.; Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe: Poznań, Polska, 1995; pp. 9–96. [Google Scholar]
- Głowacki, Z.; Falkowski, M.; Krechowski, J.; Marciniuk, J.; Marciniuk, P.; Nowicka-Falkowska, K.; Wierzba, M. Czerwona lista roślin naczyniowych Niziny Południowopodlaskiej. Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2003, 59, 5–41. [Google Scholar]
- Markowski, R.; Buliński, M. Ginące i Zagrożone Rośliny Naczyniowe Pomorza Gdańskiego; Acta Botanica Cassubica Monographiae; Katedra Taksonomii Roślin i Ochrony Przyrody Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego: Gdańsk, Poznań, 2004; Volume 1, pp. 1–94. [Google Scholar]
- Parusel, J.B.; Urbisz, A. Czerwona lista roślin naczyniowych województwa śląskiego. In Raporty Opinie 6. Strategia Ochrony Przyrody Województwa Śląskiego do Roku 2030. Raport o Stanie Przyrody Województwa Śląskiego 2. Czerwone Listy Wybranych Grup Grzybów i Roślin Województwa Śląskiego; Parusel, J.B., Ed.; Centrum Dziedzictwa Przyrody Górnego Śląska: Katowice, Poland, 2012; pp. 105–177. [Google Scholar]
- Kącki, Z.; Dajdok, Z.; Szczęśniak, E. Czerwona lista roślin naczyniowych. In Zagrożone Gatunki Flory Naczyniowej Dolnego Śląska; Kącki, Z., Ed.; Instytut Biologii Roślin Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego & Polskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Przyrody “pro Natura”: Wrocław, Poland, 2003; pp. 9–65. [Google Scholar]
- Nowak, A.; Nowak, S.; Spałek, K. Red list of vascular plants of Opole province. Opole Sci. Soc. Nat. J. 2008, 41, 141–158. [Google Scholar]
- Jackowiak, B.; Celka, Z.; Chmiel, J.; Latowski, K.; Żukowski, W. Red list of vascular flora of Wielkopolska (Poland). Biodivers. Res. Conserv. 2007, 5–8, 95–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Towpasz, K.; Kotańska, M. Endangered and threatened vascular plants in the Proszowice Plateau (Małopolska Upland, Southern Poland). Nat. Conserv. 2001, 68, 69–81. [Google Scholar]
- Grulich, V. Red list of vascular plants of the Czech Republic. 3rd edition. Preslia 2012, 84, 631–645. [Google Scholar]
- Onyshchenko, V.A.; Mosyakin, S.L.; Korotchenko, I.A.; Danylyk, I.M.; Burlaka, M.D.; Fedoronchuk, M.M.; Chorney, I.I.; Kish, R.Y.; Olshanskyi, I.H.; Shiyan, N.M.; et al. IUCN Red List Categories of Vascular Plant Species of the Ukrainian Flora; FOP Huliaeva V.M.: Kyiv, Ukraine, 2022; pp. 1–198. [Google Scholar]
- Turis, P.; Eliáš, P.; Schmotzer, A.; Király, G.; Schneider, E.; Kuciel, H.; Szewczyk, M.; Kozurak, A.; Antosyak, T.; Voloshchuk, M.; et al. Red list of vascular plants of the Carpathians. In Carpathian Red List of Forest Habitats and Species Carpathian List of Invasive Alien Species; Kadlečik, J., Ed.; The State Nature Conservancy of The Slovak Republic: Banská Bystrica, Slowakije, 2014; pp. 44–105. [Google Scholar]
- Regula-Bevilacqua, L. Red Book of Vascular Flora of Croatia: Categories EX, RE, CR, EN and VU; Nicolić, T., Topić, J., Eds.; Ministry of Culture, State Institute for Nature Protection, Republic of Croatia: Zagreb, Croatia, 2005; pp. 468–470. [Google Scholar]
- Allen, D.; Bilz, M.; Leaman, D.J.; Miller, R.M.; Timoshyna, A.; Window, J. European Red List of Medicinal Plants; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2014; pp. 1–76. [Google Scholar]
- Duan, Q.; Liu, F.; Gui, D.; Fan, W.; Cui, G.; Jia, W.; Zhu, A.; Wang, J. Phylogenetic Analysis of Wild Species and the Maternal Origin of Cultivars in the Genus Lilium Using 114 Plastid Genomes. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 865606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelkonen, V.-P. Biotechnological Approaches in Lily (Lilium) Production; Faculty of Science, Department of Biology, University of Oulu: Oulu, Finland, 2005; pp. 1–65. [Google Scholar]
- Kędra, M.; Bach, A. Morphogenesis of Lilium martagon L. explants in callus culture. Acta Biol. Cracoviensia. Ser. Bot. 2005, 47, 65–73. [Google Scholar]
- Glamočlija, U.; Haverić, S.; Čakar, J.; Rahamović, A.; Marjanović, D. In vitro propagation of Lilium martagon L. var. cattaniae Vis. and evaluation of genotoxic potential of its leaves and bulbs extracts. Acta Biol. Slov. 2010, 53, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P. Lilium: Breeding, History of the Modern Cultivar Assortment. Acta Hortic. 2011, 900, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawrocka-Grześkowiak, U.; Frydel, K. Występowanie i rozmnażanie lilii złotogłów (Lilium martagon L.) w Nadleśnictwie Kaliska. Zarządzanie Ochr. Przyr. W Lasach 2011, 5, 103–109. [Google Scholar]
- Guney, K.; Cetin, M.; Guney, K.B.; Melekoglu, A. The Effects of Some Hormone Applications on Lilium martagon L. Germination and Morpholgical Characters. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2017, 26, 2533–2538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kuczyńska, I.; Sarosiek, J.; Szymańska, E. Populacje Lilium martagon L. Acta Univ. Wratislaviensis. Pr. Bot. 1985, 28, 155–178. [Google Scholar]
- Jańczyk-Węglarska, J.; Węglarski, K. Ekologiczna i morfologiczna charakterystyka Lilium martagon L. na obszarze Wielkopolskiego Parku Narodowego. Biul. Ogrodów Bot. 1992, 5, 31–45. [Google Scholar]
- Kolon, K.; Krawczyk, A. Ekologiczna organizacja populacji Lilium martagon L. z Grudna koło Bolkowa na Dolnym Śląsku. Acta Univ. Wratisl. 1835 Pr. Bot. 1996, 68, 91–104. [Google Scholar]
- Pindel, Z. Wpływ warunków środowiskowych na populację i wzrost lilii złotogłów (Lilium martagon L.). Zesz. Probl. Post. Nauk Roln. 2002, 483, 167–172. [Google Scholar]
- Truchan, M.; Sobisz, Z. Characteristics of Lilium martagon L. population in Łasin Koszaliński (Western Pomerania, Poland). Bot.-Steciana 2009, 13, 85–95. [Google Scholar]
- Truchan, M. Population structure of Lilium martagon L. in Ciemino (Central Pomerania, Poland). Botanika-Steciana 2010, 14, 83–91. [Google Scholar]
- Truchan, M.; Sobisz, Z. Population structure of Lilium martagon L. in Zaleskie (Central Pomerania). J. Ecol. Prot. Coastaline. Balt. Coast. Zone 2012, 16, 113–129. [Google Scholar]
- Klymenko, H.; Artemenko, D.; Klymenko, I.; Kovalenko, N.; Melnyk, A.; Butenko, S.; Horbas, S.; Tovstukha, O. Criteria for evaluating the state of rare plant species populations. Mod. Phytomorphology 2023, 17, 98–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khapugin, A.; Senchugova, M. The floristic lists as a source to characterize environment conditions of habitats using phytoindication methods: A case study for Iris aphylla (Iridaceae) and Lilium martagon (Liliaceae) in central Russia. Arnaldoa 2018, 25, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balode, A. Diversity of the Martagon Lily (Lilium martagon L.) in Latvia. Scr. Horti Bot. Univ. Vytauti Magni 2013, 17, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
- Solon, J.; Borzyszkowski, J.; Bidłasik, M.; Richling, A.; Badora, K.; Balon, J.; Brzezińska-Wójcik, T.; Chabudziński, Ł.; Dobrowolski, R.; Grzegorczyk, I.; et al. Physico-geographical mesoregions of Poland: Verification and adjustment of boundaries on the basis of contemporary spatial data. Geogr. Pol. 2018, 91, 143–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dubiel, E. Mapa roślinności rzeczywistej miasta Krakowa. Zesz. Nauk. Uniw. Jagiellońskiego Pr. Bot. 1991, 22, 121–133. [Google Scholar]
- Medwecka-Kornaś, A. The association Pino-Quercetum in the past and at present in the forest „Wolski Forest” (Kraków, Southern Poland). In Geobotanist and Taxonomist. A Volume Dedicated to Professor Adam Zając on the 70th Anniversary of His Birth; Zemanek, B., Ed.; Institute of Botany, Jagiellonian University: Cracov, Poland, 2011; pp. 91–115. [Google Scholar]
- Wójcik, T.; Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K. Trait Variability in the Rare Plant Species Arum alpinum in Carpathian Beech Forest Dentario glandulosae-Fagetum (Western Carpathians, Poland). Pol. J. Ecol. 2020, 68, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wójcik, T.; Ziaja, M. New locality of Botrychium matricariifolium in south-eastern Poland—Characteristics of the habitat and some plant traits. Ecol. Quest. 2023, 34, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braun-Blanquet, J. Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde; Springer: Wien, Austria, 1964; pp. 1–865. [Google Scholar]
- Mirek, Z.; Piękoś-Mirkowa, H.; Zając, A.; Zając, M.; Bernacki, L.; Danielewicz, W.; Hügin, G.; Marciniuk, M.; Marciniuk, P.; Mitka, J.; et al. Vascular Plants of Poland. An Annotated Checklist; W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences: Kraków, Poland, 2020; pp. 1–526. [Google Scholar]
- Pielou, E.C. Population and Community Ecology: Principles and Methods; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 1974; pp. 1–424. [Google Scholar]
- Pielou, E.C. Ecological Diversity; John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1975; pp. 1–165. [Google Scholar]
- Simpson, E.H. Measurement of diversity. Nature 1949, 163, 688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tichý, L. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J. Veg. Sci. 2002, 13, 451–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellenberg, H.; Leuschner, C. Vegetation Mitteleuropasmit den Alpen. In Ökologischer, Dynamischer und Historischer Sicht; Eugen Ulmer UTB: Stuttgart, Germany, 2010; p. 1333. [Google Scholar]
- TuTiempo.net. Available online: https://en.tutiempo.net/climate/poland.html (accessed on 30 July 2025).
- Preacher, K.J. Calculation for the Chi-Square Test. 2001. Available online: https://www.quantpsy.org/chisq/chisq.htm (accessed on 30 July 2025).
- Senchugova, M.; Khapugin, A. Possibility of co-protection for populations of steppe and forest plants in alone location: A case study in Republic of Mordovia, Russia. Biodiversitas 2018, 19, 1387–1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michalik, S.; Michalik, R. Szata roślinna użytku ekologicznego Stanowisko Lilii Złotogłów na Garbie Tenczyńskim. Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2001, 57, 5–15. [Google Scholar]
- Wójcik, T.; Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K. The influence of habitat conditions on abundance and selected individual traits of Arum alpinum in the communities Populetum albae and Tilio cordatae-Carpinetum betuli (Western Carpathians). J. Plant Ecol. 2024, 16, rtad034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zlinská, J.; Šomšák, L.; Holecová, M. Ecological characteristics of the studied forest communities of an oak-hornbeam tier in SW Slovakia. Ekológia 2005, 24, 3–19. [Google Scholar]
- Klymenko, G.; Kovalenko, I.; Lykholat, Y.; Khromykh, N.; Didur, O.; Alekseeva, A. The integral assessment of the rare plant populations. Ukr. J. Ecol. 2017, 7, 201–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K.; Pliszko, A.; Gmyrek, K. The effect of informal tourist trails on the abiotic conditions and floristic composition of deciduous forest undergrowth in an urban area. Forests 2021, 12, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mascarello, C.; Sacco, E.; Carasso, V.; Zappa, E.; Suffia, G.; Mariotti, M.G.; Ruffoni, B. Evaluation of the Seed Germination of Two Protected Species: Lilium pomponium L. and Lilium martagon L. ISHS Acta Hort. 2010, 900, 385–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harper, J.P.; Williams, J.T.; Sagar, G.R. The behavior of seeds in soil. I. The heterogeneityc of soil surfaces and its role in determining the establishment of plants from seed. J. Ecol. 1965, 53, 273–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baś, G.; Bojarska, K.; Śnieżko, S.; Król, W.; Kurek, K.; Okarma, H. Wykorzystanie siedlisk przez dziki Sus scrofa na terenie Krakowa. Chrońmy Przyr. Ojczystą 2017, 73, 354–362. [Google Scholar]
- Fiorucci, A.-S.; Fankhauser, C. Plant strategies for enhancing access to sunlight. Curr. Biol. 2017, 27, 931–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khashroum, A.O.; Al Omari, Y.; Dalo, A.A.; Al-Aloosi, A.A.K.; Al-Najjar, K.A. Growth and floral characteristics of three Lilium cultivars under varying levels of treated wastewater irrigation. J. Tianjin Univ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 58, 144–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Díaz-Raviña, M.; Acea, M.J.; Carballas, T. Seasonal fluctuations in microbial populations and available nutrients in forest soils. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1993, 16, 205–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Sundert, K.; Radujković, D.; Cools, N.; De Vos, B.; Etzold, S.; Fernández-Martínez, M.; Janssens, I.; Merilä, P.; Peñuelas, J.; Sardans, J.; et al. Towards comparable assessment of the soil nutrient status across scales—Review and development of nutrient metrics. Glob. Change Biol. 2020, 26, 392–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brumme, R.; Khanna, P.K. Stand, soil and nutrient factors determining the functioning and management of beech forest ecosystems: A synopsis. In Functioning and Management of European Beech Ecosystems; Brumme, R., Khanna, P.K., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; pp. 459–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]











| Sites | Site 1 Wolski Forest | Site 2 Mount Chełm | Site 3 Hrabeński Forest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community | Tilio cordatae–Carpinetum betuli | Dentario glandulosae–Fagetum | Tilio cordatae–Carpinetum betuli |
| Average value of tree layer cover [%] | 84 | 77 | 88 |
| Average value of shrub layer cover [%] | 45 | 5 | 34 |
| Average value of herb layer cover [%] | 68 | 76 | 91 |
| Dominant species in the tree layer | Tilia cordata Quercus robur | Fagus sylvatica Acer pseudoplatanus | Carpinus betulus Acer pseudoplatanus Quercus robur |
| Dominant species in the shrub layer | Acer pseudoplatanus Acer platanoides Corylus avellana | - | Tilia cordata Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra |
| Dominant species in the herb layer | Stellaria holostea Asarum europaeum Galeobdolon luteum Polygonatum multiflorum Anemone nemorosa | Dentaria glandulosa Galeobdolon luteum Rubus hirtus | Stellaria holostea Asarum eropaeum Galeobdolon luteum Galium odoratum Lilium martagon Primula elatior Pulmonaria obscura Aegopodium podagraria |
| Year | Population | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Leaves in the Whorl | Length of the Longest Leaf in the Whorl [mm] | Width of the Longest Leaf in the Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1 | 12.50 (±3.75) | 6.10 (±1.20) a | 97.90 (±32.49) | 35.70 (±6.20) |
| 2 | 12.65 (±4.56) | 7.85 (±1.81) a | 102.56 (±19.08) | 36.37 (±10.10) | |
| 3 | 15.86 (±2.10) | 8.09 (±1.76) b | 112.55 (±17.80) | 37.55 (±6.17) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 5.95 ns | 8.65 * | 2.13 ns | 0.51 ns | |
| 2019 | 1 | 17.56 (±4.44) b | 9.40 (±2.52) b | 139.28 (±15.52) c | 39.72 (±6.30) |
| 2 | 11.53 (±3.38) a | 6.73 (±1.95) a | 97.00 (±18.88) a | 35.67 (±5.23) | |
| 3 | 18.77 (±4.64) b | 8.95 (±1.86) b | 119.14 (±12.39) b | 37.36 (±5.19) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 31.63 *** | 17.54 *** | 42.97 *** | 5.66 ns | |
| 2020 | 1 | 11.40 (±3.96) | 5.58 (±1.61) a | 101.46 (±25.90) | 33.00 (±8.32) a |
| 2 | 11.88 (±3.54) | 6.92 (±1.70) b | 101.69 (±19.96) | 32.96 (±6.72) a | |
| 3 | 13.71 (±4.15) | 7.79 (±1.47) b | 95.17 (±12.92) | 38.75 (±6.25) b | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 4.29 ns | 19.13 *** | 3.13 ns | 10.13 ** | |
| 2021 | 1 | 12.33 (±7.64) a | 5.23 (±2.35) a | 102.77 (±24.18) a | 38.61 (±16.56) a |
| 2 | 17.12 (±4.21) b | 7.43 (±1.96) b | 119.05 (±17.65) b | 45.43 (±8.08) b | |
| 3 | 14.73 (±4.53) ab | 8.69 (±2.43) b | 94.15 (±15.02) a | 34.46 (±7.60) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 13.36 ** | 24.20 *** | 20.59 *** | 18.18 *** | |
| 2022 | 1 | 12.30 (±2.86) a | 6.20 (±1.42) | 99.57 (±29.99) | 32.33 (±5.30) a |
| 2 | 16.37 (±5.22) b | 6.63 (±2.67) | 108.26 (±20.31) | 40.74 (±6.56) b | |
| 3 | 16.33 (±4.86) b | 7.30 (±2.08) | 103.70 (±18.23) | 32.96 (±6.56) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 9.24 ** | 2.69 ns | 1.05 ns | 14.69 *** | |
| 2023 | 1 | 11.02 (±3.27) a | 5.78 (±1.80) a | 111.44 (±22.41) ab | 34.48 (±7.16) a |
| 2 | 16.30 (±4.77) b | 6.74 (±1.91) a | 119.57 (±12.66) b | 44.09 (±7.85) b | |
| 3 | 18.15 (±4.62) b | 7.77 (±1.74) b | 96.31 (±12.45) a | 38.77 (±8.33) ab | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 24.55 *** | 9.90 ** | 12.91 ** | 15.27 *** |
| Year | Population | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Leaves in the Lower Whorl | Length of Leaves in the Lower Whorl [mm] | Width of Leaves in the Lower Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1 | 13.14 (±4.41) | 6.57 (±1.72) | 102.00 (±12.88) | 36.43 (±9.24) |
| 2 | 24.83 (±4.19) | 7.33 (±1.15) | 115.67 (±9.29) | 43.67 (±2.08) | |
| 3 | - | - | - | - | |
| Mann–Whitney U test | 0.00 * | 7.50 ns | 4.0 ns | 6.50 ns | |
| 2019 | 1 | 19.40 (±4.49) | 7.80 (±1.79) | 126.60 (±13.85) | 29.40 (±0.89) |
| 2 | - | - | - | - | |
| 3 | 26.38 (±5.48) | 9.75 (±3.20) | 118.88 (±15.66) | 37.38 (±7.95) | |
| Mann–Whitney U test | 6.0 * | 13.00 ns | 14.00 ns | U = 5.0 * | |
| 2020 | 1 | 15.17 (±3.71) a | 6.17 (±1.17) a | 110.83 (±13.20) | 35.00 (±6.60) |
| 2 | 20.13 (±2.25) ab | 6.25 (±0.50) ab | 109.50 (±8.35) | 45.75 (±6.65) | |
| 3 | 22.17 (3.72) b | 8.33 (1.86) b | 109.33 (15.53) | 34.67 (5.35) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 7.20 * | 7.51 * | 0.5 ns | 5.96 ns | |
| 2021 | 1 | 22.86 (±3.39) | 6.57 (±1.90)a | 128.71 (±11.83) | 38.43 (±7.46) |
| 2 | 23.06 (±3.97) | 6.44 (±1.01)a | 125.22 (±10.24) | 42.11 (±4.23) | |
| 3 | 31.25 (±6.40) | 11.00 (±1.83)b | 109.75 (±8.14) | 41.00 (±6.22) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 5.84 ns | 8.67 * | 5.97 ns | 1.07 ns | |
| 2022 | 1 | 19.58 (±6.40) | 5.54 (±0.78)a | 117.92 (±14.92) | 34.62 (±6.28) a |
| 2 | 26.00 (±5.08) | 6.91 (±1.30)ab | 115.64 (±15.69) | 43.73 (±7.81) b | |
| 3 | 27.14 (±5.61) | 8.29 (±2.43)b | 103.43 (±17.89) | 34.14 (±5.58) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 7.21 ns | 9.38 ** | 3.42 ns | 8.24 * | |
| 2023 | 1 | 19.67 (±2.08) | 5.33 (±0.58) | 123.00 (±14.73) | 38.00 (±2.65) |
| 2 | 23.14 (±3.02) | 7.57 (±1.40) | 118.57 (±6.92) | 45.57 (±6.13) | |
| 3 | 27.00 (±5.66) | 8.50 (±2.12) | 117.50 (±7.78) | 37.00 (±1.41) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 4.23 ns | 5.80 ns | 0.9 ns | 5.67 ns |
| Year | Population | Height of Stem [cm] | Number of Flowers | Number of Whorls |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1 | 78.39 (±20.71) b | 3.56 (±1.82) b | 2.28 (±0.89) b |
| 2 | 68.75 (±13.06) a | 2.60 (±1.40) a | 1.40 (±0.50) a | |
| 3 | 76.29 (±11.05)b | 3.26 (±1.41) b | 1.42 (±0.51) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 12.43 ** | 13.04 ** | 14.18 *** | |
| 2019 | 1 | 97.00 (±11.34) b | 6.20 (±1.10) b | 3.00 (±0.71) b |
| 2 | 55.27 (±14.42) a | 2.27 (±0.90) a | 1.73 (±0.47) a | |
| 3 | 77.45 (±11.76) b | 3.10 (±1.09) a | 1.83 (±0.38) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 20.40 *** | 16.34 *** | 15.96 *** | |
| 2020 | 1 | 67.10 (±24.40) ab | 2.60 (±2.03) a | 1.37 (±0.49) a |
| 2 | 59.79 (±12.27) a | 2.17 (±0.93) a | 1.62 (±0.49) ab | |
| 3 | 75.20 (±12.30) b | 3.80 (±1.65) b | 1.83 (±0.46) b | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 15.57 ** | 20.65 *** | 13.81 ** | |
| 2021 | 1 | 61.17 (±13.60) a | 2.89 (±1.32) | 1.44 (±0.51) |
| 2 | 61.53 (±9.98) a | 2.43 (±0.82) | 1.77 (±0.50) | |
| 3 | 70.27 (±11.18) b | 3.03 (±1.16) | 1.53 (±0.51) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 12.47 ** | 5.90 ns | 4.97 ns | |
| 2022 | 1 | 81.33 (±13.65) | 1.67 (±0.58)a | 1.67 (±0.58) |
| 2 | 72.93 (±11.32) | 2.68 (±0.90)a | 1.82 (±0.39) | |
| 3 | 81.30 (±14.61) | 4.13 (±1.38)b | 2.10 (±0.66) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 4.68 ns | 19.67 *** | 3.98 ns | |
| 2023 | 1 | 58.67 (±9.87) ab | 2.33 (±0.58) a | 1.67 (±0.58) |
| 2 | 56.30 (±11.29) a | 2.40 (±0.84) a | 1.70 (±0.48) | |
| 3 | 85.43 (±17.08) b | 4.53 (±2.21) b | 2.07 (±0.58) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 18.07 *** | 11.60 ** | 3.80 ns |
| Year | Population | Number of Leaves in the Lowest Whorl | Length of the Longest Leaf in the Lowest Whorl [mm] | Width of the Longest Leaf in the Lowest Whorl [mm] | Number of Spiral Leaves | Length of Spiral Leaf Above the Highest Whorl [mm] | Width of the Spiral Leaf Above the Highest Whorl [mm] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 1 | 6.50 (±1.72) a | 129.72 (±19.04) | 35.72 (±6.80) | 7.17 (±2.15) b | 103.33 (±12.01) | 26.17 (±6.95) |
| 2 | 7.50 (±1.66) a | 116.93 (±12.53) | 39.53 (±5.81) | 5.20 (±2.02) a | 94.73 (±16.35) | 25.13 (±7.89) | |
| 3 | 9.00 (±1.76) b | 119.42 (±18.68) | 39.63 (±6.23) | 5.26 (±1.48) a | 94.63 (±14.42) | 23.68 (±7.54) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 27.02 *** | 4.56 ns | 3.25 ns | 12.71 * | 4.28 ns | 4.39 ns | |
| 2019 | 1 | 6.60 (±2.70) a | 147.80 (±22.86) | 40.60 (±9.86) | 7.20 (±2.77) b | 102.60 (±9.13) | 20.20 (±1.79) |
| 2 | 7.45 (±2.38) a | 123.27 (±16.03) | 39.36 (±5.52) | 3.73 (±1.10) a | 89.09 (±18.24) | 23.45 (±8.86) | |
| 3 | 9.47 (±2.69) b | 126.13 (±11.99) | 38.63 (±6.89) | 4.73 (±1.91) ab | 83.37 (±19.35) | 16.73 (±5.94) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 10.95 ** | 5.33 ns | 0.40 ns | 10.30 ** | 4.99 ns | 5.81 ns | |
| 2020 | 1 | 5.57 (±1.43) | 119.57 (±13.68) | 32.93 (±6.86) | 8.50 (±2.05) b | 112.43 (±17.07) b | 30.53 (±7.62) b |
| 2 | 6.86 (±1.64) | 110.69 (±16.91) | 34.93 (±8.90) | 3.59 (±1.45) a | 83.59 (±22.41) a | 21.38 (±9.20) a | |
| 3 | 8.00 (±1.51) | 118.50 (±10.11) | 35.43 (±9.17) | 4.30 (±1.32) a | 89.10 (±15,34) a | 21.83 (±17.25) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 4.73 ns | 4.17 ns | 2.94 ns | 55.90 *** | 28.98 *** | 23.87 *** | |
| 2021 | 1 | 6.00 (±1.37) a | 124.50 (±19.31) b | 36.78 (±6.23) a | 6.83 (±3.47) b | 105.72 (±25.77)b | 25.89 (±11.25) b |
| 2 | 7.27 (±1.57) b | 125.63 (±13.84) b | 42.70 (±5.62) b | 3.80 (±1.30) a | 95.37 (±13.02)b | 23.07 (±5.62) b | |
| 3 | 8.37 (±1.67) b | 109.67 (±14.92) a | 36.73 (±7.23) a | 4.43 (±1.91) a | 81.83 (±20.05)a | 18.00 (±9.01) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 19.41 *** | 15.96 *** | 13.97 *** | 15.51 *** | 13.06 ** | 9.11 * | |
| 2022 | 1 | 6.33 (±0.58) a | 134.00 (±19.31) b | 40.00 (±8.66) ab | 7.67 (±0.58) b | 113.33 (±7.64)b | 28.33 (±2.89) b |
| 2 | 7.21 (±1.91) a | 131.39 (±18.40) b | 43.00 (±6.73) b | 4.11 (±1.50) a | 95.50 (±16.51)b | 23.04 (±6.60) ab | |
| 3 | 9.37 (±3.80) b | 119.67 (±16.10) a | 36.33 (±6.29) a | 4.77 (±2.31) a | 84.90 (±14.16)a | 18.90 (±4.71) a | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 10.71 ** | 8.69 * | 12.28 ** | 8.37 * | 11.24 ** | 9.44 ** | |
| 2023 | 1 | 7.00 (±0.00) | 120.67 (±29.96) | 33.00 (±14.80) ab | 4.00 (±1.00) | 97.67 (±28.99) | 23.00 (±9.54) |
| 2 | 8.40 (±1.71) | 125.20 (±12.00) | 41.30 (±5.01) b | 4.70 (±1.42) | 88.60 (±22.07) | 21.10 (±7.64) | |
| 3 | 8.33 (±1.65) | 118.80 (±15.56) | 35.03 (±5.51) a | 4.73 (±1.60) | 83.13 (±12.91) | 18.03 (±5.22) | |
| Kruskal–Wallis H test | 3.33 ns | 2.11 ns | 6.87 * | 0.57 ns | 3.36 ns | 2.85 ns |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Wójcik, T.; Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K.; Ziaja, M. Spatio-Temporal Variability Description of the Rare Species Lilium martagon L. in Different Habitat Conditions. Biology 2026, 15, 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology15050398
Wójcik T, Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt K, Ziaja M. Spatio-Temporal Variability Description of the Rare Species Lilium martagon L. in Different Habitat Conditions. Biology. 2026; 15(5):398. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology15050398
Chicago/Turabian StyleWójcik, Tomasz, Kinga Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, and Maria Ziaja. 2026. "Spatio-Temporal Variability Description of the Rare Species Lilium martagon L. in Different Habitat Conditions" Biology 15, no. 5: 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology15050398
APA StyleWójcik, T., Kostrakiewicz-Gierałt, K., & Ziaja, M. (2026). Spatio-Temporal Variability Description of the Rare Species Lilium martagon L. in Different Habitat Conditions. Biology, 15(5), 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology15050398

