10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587
Si riportano in questo lavoro i risultati inerenti l’utilizzo di un protocollo standardizzato per la valutazione della diveristà macrofungina. Tale metodologia, sviluppata per lo studio della biodiversità di organismi come i macrofunghi o gli insetti, offre numerosi vantaggi in ambito ecologico, quali: ridurre lo sforzo di campionamento e ottenere dati comparabili con quelli di altre ricerche simili. Durante il primo workshop nazionale sulle ectomicorrize si è proceduto all’applicazione di questo metodo con la finalità di avere un quadro della micodiversità del sito prescelto: un impianto artificiale di Abete bianco nel nordovest della Sardegna. Basandosi sull’osservazione quali- e quantitativa degli sporomi presenti, sono stati complessivamente rilevati 606 basidiomi, riconducibili a 52 taxa (Basidiomycota). I valori degli indici di biodiversità calcolati, in particolare l’indice di Shannon (H’), mostrano che l’area è caratterizzata da un considerevole valore di micodiversità. Inoltre, confrontando i dati ottenuti con quelli di un’indagine precedente, svolta nello stesso sito per un periodo complessivo di tre anni, è interessante notare simili valori di diversità. Ciò induce ad ipotizzare che il metodo di monitoraggio proposto ha consentito di osservare una significativa percentuale di specie rispetto al totale rilevato applicando un approccio di campionamento che ha richiesto un maggiore impegno di risorse. Si è proceduto inoltre al confronto dei valori ottenuti nel sito sardo con quelli osservati in un’abetina naturale in Liguria, monitorata seguendo lo stesso protocollo. I valori simili di ricchezza di specie e H’ index ci permettono di affermare che riforestazioni di abete bianco ospitano un valore di micodiversità comparabile a quello di aree naturali. Studi futuri potranno confermare tali risultati e validare questa metodologia per lo studio della diversità macrofungina in ambiente mediterraneo.
application/pdf
2531-7342
5587
en
Mirca Zotti
Italian Journal of Mycology
Shannon Index
Assessment of macrofungal diversity in a Silver Fir plantation in Sardinia (Italy) using a standardized sampling procedure
Text.Serial.Journal
https://italianmycology.unibo.it/
44
Articles
2015-12-15
2015-11-18
2015-12-15
2018-08-20
1-17
Ital J Mycol
Mirca Zotti
2015/12/15
10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587
1
University of Genova
2531-7342
Shannon Index
en
17
Assessment of macrofungal diversity in a Silver Fir plantation in Sardinia (Italy) using a standardized sampling procedure
https://italianmycology.unibo.it/article/download/5587/5295
44
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.              Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587



   Assessment of macrofungal diversity in a Silver
   Fir plantation in Sardinia (Italy) using a
   standardized sampling procedure
   ______________________________________________________________________________

       Elia Ambrosio1, Enrico Lancellotti2, Renato Brotzu3, Horia Salch4, Antonio
                                         Franceschini2, Mirca Zotti1

   1
     Laboratorio di Micologia, Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, della Ambiente e della Vita (DISTAV),
   Università degli Studi di Genova, Corso Europa 26, 16132 Genova, Italy.
   2
     Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Sassari, Viale Italia 39, 07100 Sassari, Italy.
   4
     Località Bugnuneddu, 83 Luogosanto, Olbia Tempio, Italy.
   3
     Gruppo Micologico Nuorese,Via Lombardia 51, 08100 Nuoro, Italy.

   Corresponding Author E. Ambrosio e-mail: elia.ambrosio.10@gmail.com

   Abstract

       The knowledge of macrofungal diversity associated with Silver Fir forests in Italy is quite scarce. Only a
       little information is available about macrofungal communities from some Ligurian and Tuscan Silver Fir
       sites. This study aims to assess the macrofungal diversity of a Silver Fir plantation in Sardinia by the
       application of a standardized sampling procedure. A total of 606 sporomata were collected and 52
       Basidiomycota were identified. The high value of the Shannon Index indicated a considerable level of
       macrofungal diversity in this plantation. The results were also compared with the diversity indices obtained
       by a previous 3-years long sampling methodology in the same site. The comparison of the macrofungal
       diversity values of the Sardinian site with those of the Ligurian Silver Fir forest revealed interesting
       similarities among natural versus planted coniferous forests.

       Keywords: macrofungal diversity; Abies alba; conifer plantations; standardized sampling procedure;
       Shannon Index

   Riassunto

       Si riportano in questo lavoro i risultati inerenti l’utilizzo di un protocollo standardizzato per la valutazione
       della diveristà macrofungina. Tale metodologia, sviluppata per lo studio della biodiversità di organismi come
       i macrofunghi o gli insetti, offre numerosi vantaggi in ambito ecologico, quali: ridurre lo sforzo di
       campionamento e ottenere dati comparabili con quelli di altre ricerche simili.
       Durante il primo workshop nazionale sulle ectomicorrize si è proceduto all’applicazione di questo metodo
       con la finalità di avere un quadro della micodiversità del sito prescelto: un impianto artificiale di Abete
       bianco nel nordovest della Sardegna. Basandosi sull’osservazione quali- e quantitativa degli sporomi
       presenti, sono stati complessivamente rilevati 606 basidiomi, riconducibili a 52 taxa (Basidiomycota). I
       valori degli indici di biodiversità calcolati, in particolare l’indice di Shannon (H’), mostrano che l’area è

                                                                                                                     1
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.            Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

        caratterizzata da un considerevole valore di micodiversità. Inoltre, confrontando i dati ottenuti con quelli di
        un’indagine precedente, svolta nello stesso sito per un periodo complessivo di tre anni, è interessante notare
        simili valori di diversità. Ciò induce ad ipotizzare che il metodo di monitoraggio proposto ha consentito di
        osservare una significativa percentuale di specie rispetto al totale rilevato applicando un approccio di
        campionamento che ha richiesto un maggiore impegno di risorse.
        Si è proceduto inoltre al confronto dei valori ottenuti nel sito sardo con quelli osservati in un’abetina naturale
        in Liguria, monitorata seguendo lo stesso protocollo. I valori simili di ricchezza di specie e H’ index ci
        permettono di affermare che riforestazioni di abete bianco ospitano un valore di micodiversità comparabile a
        quello di aree naturali. Studi futuri potranno confermare tali risultati e validare questa metodologia per lo
        studio della diversità macrofungina in ambiente mediterraneo.

        Parole chiave: micodiversità; Abies alba; riforestazione; metodo di campionamento standardizzato; indice di
        Shannon

    Introduction

    Macrofungi play fundamental roles in forest ecosystems and the measurement of their species richness and
    diversity can potentially allow us to monitor the health of natural systems (EGLI 2011; FEEST 2013;
    BODDY et al. 2014). It has been widely demonstrated that environmental changes (e.g. climate change)
    affect the species richness and composition of the macrofungal communities (TÓTH & BARTA 2010;
    BÜNTENG et al. 2012; BODDY et al. 2014). Hence, the monitoring of fungal dynamics over time, can be
    used as an indicator for forest perturbations (JAKUCS 1988; ARNOLDS 1991; FELLNER & PESKOVA 1995;
    AMARANTHUS 1999; TÓTH & BARTA 2010). Moreover, macrofungal diversity appears to be a useful tool
    for assessing priorities in sites of conservation, since fungi are considered organisms whose biodiversity is
    closely correlated with the total biodiversity of a site (ZOTTI & ZAPPATORE 2006; FEEST 2006, 2010;
    ORTEGA & LORITE 2007).
    Among different forest types, coniferous plantations are considered important environments because they
    provide a habitat for diverse macrofungal species (FERRIS et al. 2000). HUMPHREY et al. (2000) for
    instance, highlight the role of both native and exotic conifer plantations in the conservation of native fungi.
    In Italy, very few studies have been targeted to investigate the above ground macrofungal diversity of
    coniferous habitats. An example is given by the study of ZOTTI et al. (2013a) concerning the macrofungal
    diversity associated with European Black pine (Pinus nigra Aiton) plantations in North-western Italy
    (Liguria). Some other information is available about natural and artificial Silver Fir (Abies alba Mill.)
    forests in central Italy (Tuscany) by PERINI et al. (1995), LAGANÀ et al. (2000, 2002), PECORARO et al.
    (2007), and SALERNI & PERINI (2010). Nevertheless, due to the differences in the sampling methodology
    adopted in these aforementioned studies (e.g. presence or absence of plots, plots size, sampling effort, time
    and duration of surveys), making comparisons among these Italian conifer sites is quite difficult.
    Due to the importance of the macrofungal diversity assessment and the partial lack of knowledge on the
    Italian coniferous forests, we carried out a mycological study in a Silver Fir site of Sardinia by the using of
    a standardized sampling method (FEEST 2006). This site was previously surveyed to assess the
    macrofungal species diversity, by following a traditional 3-years long survey approach (AMBROSIO et al.
    2014).
    The FEEST (2006) sampling approach has been developed to describe the biodiversity of cryptic taxonomic
    groups, such as macrofungi and insects (FEEST 2006, 2010; FEEST et al. 2011; FEEST & CARDOSO 2012),
    computing a set of diversity indices (MAGURRAN 2004).


    2
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.           Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


   FEEST (2006) proposed an approach that can reduce the time and effort to the survey to one year, as long as
   it is favourable to sporomata (KIRK et al. 2008) production. This aspect is particularly important in
   mycology since the traditional sampling methods require a lot of effort: from 2 to 3 (ARNOLDS 1981, 1982;
   VILLENEUVE et al. 1989, 1991a, 1991b), up to 10 years (ORTON 1986). Moreover, the development of
   simple and quick methodologies, which could reduce the time and costs involved in monitoring actions, is
   also needed for studying the total biodiversity (SANTI et al. 2010) as well.
   The aims of our study were to: i) assess the macrofungal diversity using a standardized sampling approach
   (1-y long); ii) to verify whether different sampling methods (1-y and 3-y) provide the same macrofungal
   diversity indices; and finally iii) to compare the level of macrofungal diversity of natural and artificial
   coniferous forests in Italy.

   Materials and Methods

   Study area
   Sardinia is the second largest island (24090 km2) in the Mediterranean basin, characterized by a high
   number of plants (BLASI et al. 2007) and macrofungi (VENTURELLA et al. 2011), as well as a wide variety
   of vegetation habitats (BACCHETTA et al. 2009). During the19th century several areas were planted with
   exotic conifers, such as: Abies alba Mill., A. cephalonica Loudon, Cedrus atlantica (Endl.) Carr., and
   Pinus nigra Arnold.
   A mono-specific A. alba plantation, located in North-west Sardinia, on the Limbara mountain (Madonna
   della Neve Locality, OT), was selected to study the macrofungal diversity. This kind of habitat is an
   unique example in Sardinia, since no other Silver Fir site can be found in the whole region.
   The site covers an area of about 4500 m2 and it is characterized by a Mediterranean climate (RIVAS-
   MARTINEZ 2008), with the mean annual temperature of 14.2°C [from 3°C (min) in February to 20°C
   (max) in July)]. The mean annual rainfall is 1300 mm (climate-data.org, 2015).
   Geologically, the substrate consists of leucogranite rocks with a pH close to 5 (PASSINO 1981).
   Sampling procedure and data collection
   Accordingly to the FEEST (2006) procedure, during the autumn of 2013, both the qualitative (identification
   of species) and quantitative (number of sporomata) macrofungal observations were performed in 20
   circular plots (4 m radius) selected along line transects (total length of 400 m). The total size of the sample
   site covers a surface of approximately 1000 m2.
   All the macrofungi (Agarics, Boletes and Gasteromycetes) with a given shape and visible to the naked eye
   were recorded in each plot. Hypogeous and resupinate lignicolous species (Corticiaceae s.l. and
   Polyporaceae s.l.) were not taken into account in this study.
   The taxonomical identification was performed by analyzing both the macro- and microscopical characters
   (for more details see AMBROSIO et al. 2014). Systematic classification followed HIBBETT et al. (2007) and
   KIRK et al. (2008). Nomenclature and author abbreviations were used in accordance with CABI
   (www.indexfungorum.org), CBS (www.cbs.knaw.nl), and IMA (www.mycobank.org).
   Data analyses
   The collected dataset was inserted into the specific program FUNGIB                            (available    at
   www.ecosulis.co.uk/page/fungib-programme) to calculate the following diversity indices:



                                                                                                                3
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.         Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


    - Species richness (S) was computed by the number of species recorded. The richness S expresses the
    alpha diversity and is the simplest measure of biodiversity (MAGURRAN 2004; ZAK & WILLING 2004).

    - Shannon index (1948) (H’) is commonly used to characterize species diversity in a community and it
    depends on the total number of species and their occurrence. H’ was calculated by the formula:
                  M
    H ' = − ∑ pi ln pi
                i =1


    where:
    M is the total number of species
    pi is the ratio of individuals found belonging to the i-th species.

    - Evenness (E) (PIELOU 1969, 1975) of the Shannon index was calculated as:

    E =H’/HMAX

    where HMAX is the diversity that can be observed if all species are equally likely.
    Evenness is a measure of biodiversity which quantifies how equal the community is numerically.

    - Simpson’s index (D) was computed by the formula:
            M
    D =    ∑
           i =1
                  ni ( ni −1)
                  N ( N −1)




    where ni is the number of individuals in the i-th species and N is the total number of individuals. Simpson
    index is weighted by the abundance of the most common species: when D increases, diversity decreases
    (SIMPSON 1949).

    - Berger-Parker index (d) expresses the proportional abundance of the most abundant species (BERGER &
    PARKER 1970); it was calculated by the formula:

    d = NMAX/N


    where NMAX is the number of individuals in the most abundant species and N is the total number of
    individuals.

    - Density was used to measure the number of sporomata per total sampled area.


    - Species Conservation Value Index (SCVI) was used to evaluate the rarity of the recorded species. Each
    species was labeled with a number (1-5), in order to indicate its distribution in the Italian territory.
    National references (ONOFRI et al. 2005; BOCCARDO et al. 2008) were used to assign SCVI value to each
    species. SCVI = 1 indicates the most common species; SCVI = 5 for the rarest.


    4
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.         Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587



   - Non-parametric estimator and rarefaction curve was used to estimate the species richness and to
   check whether data collected allowed observation of a notable number of species. CHAO1 is the simplest
   method to extrapolate the “true” number of species in an assemblage and it is based on the number of
   singleton and doubleton species (CHAO 1984; MAGURRAN 2004). Rarefaction generates the expected
   number of species in a small collection of individuals drawn at random from the whole pool of individuals.
   The curve generally rises very quickly at first and then flattens since a reasonable number of individuals
   have been considered (GOTELLI & COLWELL 2001, 2011; COLWELL et al. 2012). In this work, sampled-
   based rarefaction curves were computed and plotted by R system (version 3.1.0, R CORE TEAM 2014). The
   number of taxa was plotted as a function of the accumulated number of individuals. We used the function
   “rarefy” in the Vegan package version 2.0-7 (OKSANEN et al. 2013) to plot the curves with the
   corresponding iterative error around the mean.

   Results

   Altogether 606 sporomata were collected and 52 species belong to Basidiomycota were identified. Table 1
   lists the species recorded with the respective number of sporomata and SCVI value.
   Figures 1 and 2 display the distribution of species richness and abundance values per plots, respectively.
   The mean richness value was 7.5 ± 2.2. The highest number of species was 12 (in plot 7), the lowest
   number was 4 (in both plot 14 and 18). The mean number of sporomata was 30 ± 16.2. The highest
   number of sporomata (viz. 60) was collected in plot 15; the lowest (viz. 5) in plot number 14.
   The diversity indices (e.g. S= 52; H’= 3.26; E= 0.82; SCVI= 3.13) and non-parametric estimator (viz.
   CHAO= 56.05) results are displayed in Table 2. Finally, the accumulation curve is shown in Figure 3.
   Figures 4-9 show some of the most interesting species.

   Discussion

   The application of a standardized sampling procedure allowed us to measure the macrofungal diversity of
   a Silver Fir site in Sardinia. The results showed that this area is characterized by a considerable value of
   macrofungal diversity. The Shannon value obtained (H’= 3.26) for instance, revealed a high level of
   macrofungal diversity since, this index usually falls between 1-4 (MAGURRAN 2004). This result agrees
   with the data observed by a previous mycological investigations performed in the same area (AMBROSIO et
   al. 2014) and other reports on macrofungal communities in Italy (ONOFRI et al. 2005; PAUTASSO & ZOTTI
   2009; VENTURELLA et al. 2011), which highlighted that Sardinia is the most diverse and richest
   macrofungal Italian region.
   In spite of the high macrofungal richness, several areas of this region are still uninvestigated or poorly-
   known from a mycological point of view. Thanks to the results obtained by the present work and by
   AMBROSIO et al. (2014), new information and records are now available for Sardinia. No macrofungal
   records associated to Abies alba in Sardinia were in fact, included in the Italian macrofungal checklist
   (ONOFRI et al. 2005). Moreover, the high SCVI value (= 3.13) confirms the presence of rare and
   uncommon species as also detailed in AMBROSIO et al. (2014).
   The comparison between the results presented in this study with those of AMBROSIO et al. (2014) highlight
   that Feest’s proposed method (FEEST 2006) allowed us to record a significant percentage of species. The
   number of the observed taxa is very close to the estimated CHAO1 value and it corresponds to the 43% of
   the total species collected over three consecutive sampling years, using a “traditional” macrofungal survey.

                                                                                                             5
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.           Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


    Moreover, it is worth noting that the Shannon Index obtained by the traditional 3-y long survey method
    (AMBROSIO et al. 2014) is quite similar to the H’ value computed, in this study, by the standardized 1-y
    long survey method (see Tab. 3).
    This result is relevant if we consider that Feest’s approach requires a lower sampling effort (AMBROSIO
    2015) than traditional methods used for the macrofungal survey (i.e. ARNOLDS 1981, 1982).
    The application of a common sampling procedure made it possible to compare the Sardinian site with a
    natural Silver Fir site located in Liguria (NW Italy), where Feest’s sampling methodology was applied in
    order to assess the macrofungal diversity value as well (AMBROSIO et al. 2012; ZOTTI et al. 2013b).




              Fig. 1: Distribution of species richness per plot.
              Fig. 1: Rappresentazione grafica del numero totale di specie osservate in ogni singolo plot.




              Fig. 2: Distribution of the sporomata abundance per plot.
              Fig. 2: Rappresentazione grafica del numero totale di sporomi raccolti in ogni singolo plot.


    6
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.               Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


   Tab. 2: Summary of diversity indices calculated
   for the macrofungal community.
   Tab. 2: Sintesi dei valori degli indici di
   biodiversità calcolati.
   Index                             Value
   Species Richness (S)                  52
   Shannon-Wiener Index (H’)             3.26
   Eveness (E)                           0.82
   Simpson Index (D)                     18.38
   Berger-Parker Dominance Index         0.11
   (d)
   Density                               0.60 per m2
   Species Conservation Value Index      3.13
   (SCVI)
   CHAO 1                                56.05
                                                             Fig. 3: Sampled-based accumulation curve. Sites refer to plots.
                                                             Fig. 3: Rappresentazione grafica della curva di rarefazione
                                                             costruita sulla ricchezza di specie osservata in ogni plot.

   The results summarized in Table 3 show that both natural and artificial Silver Fir sites are characterized by
   similar values of species richness and diversity. This result agrees with other European studies (FERRIS et
   al. 2000; HUMPHREY et al. 2000; O’HANLON & HARRINGTON 2012). In Britain and Ireland the
   comparison of macrofungal diversity (in terms of both Species Richness and the Shannon Index), of
   conifer plantations and semi-natural woodlands have shown no differences in species diversity and
   composition.

   Tab. 3: Biodiversity indices of coniferous forests of Sardinia and Liguria.
   Tab. 3: Indici di biodiversità relativi a foreste di Abete bianco della Sardegna e Liguria.
  Location        Site      Vegetation Species Richness Shannon Index                       References        Number
                                                                                                                 of
                                                                                                              sampling
                                                                                                                years
                                                  52                 3.26          Present study                  1
  Sardinia    Plantation   Silver Fir
                                                 119                 4.35          AMBROSIO et al. 2014           3
  Liguria     Natural      Silver Fir             64                 4.00          AMBROSIO et al. 2012           1




   Conclusions

   Our study gives a contribution to the knowledge on macrofungal diversity associated with the Silver Fir
   plantation in Sardinia, which is characterized by a high value of Shannon Index.
   The use of the same standardized sampling approach has allowed the comparison between two coniferous
   sites in Italy. The obtained results indicate that the artificial Silver Fir site of Sardinia shows a macrofungal
   diversity value similar to those of the natural Silver Fir forest of Liguria.

                                                                                                                      7
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.       Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


    Further studies are needed to improve the knowledge of macrofungal diversity associated with both natural
    and artificial Silver Fir forests of Italy. Moreover, a wider number of studies are needed to confirm that 3-y
    and 1-y long sampling approaches give comparable results in terms of biodiversity. If the effectiveness of
    this method can be shown, it could be of considerable benefit for biodiversity assessment, by the study of
    difficult taxonomical group of organisms, such as macrofungi.

    Acknowledgements

    The results reported in this work are part of a survey conducted during the "1st National Workshop on
    Ectomycorrhizas" (Tempio Pausania, 11-13 November 2013), organized by the Italian mycological
    association "Unione Micologica Italiana". The authors would like to thank the ‘Ente Foreste della
    Sardegna” and the “Corpo Forestale e di Vigilanza Ambientale” for their logistic assistance and Teresa
    Hunt for the linguistic revision. Anonymous reviewers are also acknowledged for useful comments and
    observations

    References

    AMARANTHUS M.P. (1999). The importance and conservation of ectomycorrhizal fungal diversity in forest
      ecosystems: lessons from Europe and the Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-431.
      Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest research Station, 15
      pp.

    AMBROSIO E., DI PIAZZA S., PAVARINO M., MARIOTTI M.G., ZOTTI M. (2012). Micodiversità in fitocenosi
      di abete bianco in Liguria. XIX Congresso Nazionale di Micologia (XIX UMI), Gubbio, Italia 11-12
      Ottobre 2012. Pg. 8.

    AMBROSIO E., BROTZU R., LANCELLOTTI E., FRANCESCHINI A., ZOTTI M. (2014). Macrofungi in Abies
      alba Miller plantation in North-western Sardinia, Italy. Micologia Italiana XLIII, 1-2-3:5-26.

    AMBROSIO E. (2015). Assessing macrofungal diversity using two different survey approaches. Pg. 50-71
      in: Ambrosio E. (2015) Analysis and characterization of Boletus edulis group: an ecological and
      economic resource. PhD Thesis. 202 pp.

    ARNOLDS E. (1981). Ecology and coenology of macrofungi in grasslands and moist heathlands in Drenthe,
      the Netherlands. Part 1. Introduction and synecology. Bibl. Mycol. 83: 1-410.

    ARNOLDS E. (1982). Ecology and coenology of macrofungi in grasslands and moist heathlands in Drenthe,
      the Netherlands. Part 2. Autoecology. Part 3. Taxonomy. Bibl. Mycol. 90: 1-510.

    ARNOLDS E. (1991). Decline of ectomycorrhizal fungi in Europe. Agriculture, Ecosystem & Environment,
      35, 209-244.

    BACCHETTA G., BAGELLA S., BIONDI E., FARRIS E., FILIGHEDDU R.S., MOSSA L. (2009). Vegetazione
      forestale e serie di vegetazione della Sardegna (con rappresentazione cartografica alla scala 1:350000).
      Fitosociologia 46 (1) – Suppl. 1. Pavia, Società italiana di fitosociologia, 82 pp.

    BERGER W.H., PARKER F.L. (1970). Diversity of planktonic Foraminifera in deep sea sedimentary.
      Science 168: 1345-1347.

    BOCCARDO F., TRAVERSO M., VIZZINI A., ZOTTI M. (2008). Guida ai funghi d’Italia. Zanichelli Editore,
      Bologna, 620 pp.


    8
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.          Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

   BODDY L., BUNTENG U., EGLI S., GANGE A.C., HEEGAARD E., KIRK P.M., MOHAMMAD A., KAUSERUD H.
     (2014). Climate variation effects on fungal fruiting. Fungal Ecology 10: 20-33.

   BLASI C., BOITANI L., LA POSTA S., MANES F., MARCHETTI M. (2007). Biodiversity in Italy. Contribution
     to the National Biodiversity Strategy. Palombi & Partner Editore s.r.l. Roma, 460 pp.

   BÜNTENG U., KAUSERUD H., EGLI S. (2012). Linking climate variability to mushroom productivity and
     phenology. Front Ecol Environ 10(1) : 14-19.

   CHAO A. (1984). Non-parametric estimation of the number of classes in a population. Scandinavian
     Journal of Statistics 11: 265-270.

   COLWELL R.K., CHAO A., GOTELLI N.J., LIN S-Y, MAO C.X., CHAZDON R.L., LONGINO J.T. (2012).
     Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation, and
     comparison of assemblages. Journal of Plant Ecology 5:3-21.

   EGLI S. (2011).Mycorrhizal mushroom diversity and productivity – an indicator of forest health?. Annals
     of forest Sciences 68: 81-88.

   FELLNER R., PESKVA V. (1995). Effects of industrial pollutants on ectomycorrhizal relationships in
     temperature forests. Canadian journal of Botany 73: S1310-S1315.

   FEEST A. (2006). Establishing baseline indices for the quality of the biodiversity of restored habitats using
     a standardized sampling process. Restoration Ecology 14(1):112-122.

   FEEST A., ALDRED TD, JEDAMZIK K. (2010). Biodiversity quality: a paradigm for biodiversity. Ecol. Ind.
     10:1077-1082.

   FEEST A., VAN SWAAY C., ALDRED T.D., JEDAMZIK K. (2011). The biodiversity quality of butterfly sites:
     A metadata assessment. Ecological Indicators 11:669-675.

   FEEST A., CARDOSO P. (2012). The comparison of site spider “biodiversity quality” in Portuguese
     protected areas. Ecol. Ind. 14:229-235.

   FEEST A. (2013). The utility of the Streamlining European Biodiversity Indicators 2010 (SEBI 2010).
     Ecological Indicators 28:16-21.

   FERRIS R., PEACE A.J., NEWTON A.C. (2000). Macrofungal communities of lowland Scots pine (Pinus
     sylvestris L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karsten.) plantations in England: relationships with
     site factors and stand structure. Forest ecology and Management 131: 1-3 pp. 255-267.

   GOTELLI N., COLWELL R.K. (2001). Quantifying biodiversity: Procedures and pitfalls in the measurement
     and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4: 379-391.

   GOTELLI N.J., COLWELL R.K. (2011). Estimating species richness. In: Magurran AE, McGill BJ,
     editors. Frontiers in measuring biodiversity. Oxford University Press, New York.

   HIBBETT D.S., BINDER M., BISCHOFF J.F., BLACKWELL M., CANNON P.F., ERIKSSON O.E., HUHNDORF S.,
      JAMES T., KIRK P.M., LÜCKING R., et al., (2007). A higher-level phylogenetic classification of the
      Fungi. Mycological Research 111, 509-547.

   HUMPREY J.W., NEWTON A.C., PEACE A.J., HOLDEN E. (2000). The importance of conifer plantations in
     northern Britain as a habitat for native fungi. Biological Conservation, 96, 241-252.

   JAKUCS W. (1988). Ecological approach to forest decay in Hungary. Ambio, 17, 241-272.

                                                                                                              9
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.      Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587


    KIRK P.M., CANNON P.F., MINTER D.W., STALPERS J.A. (2008). Dictionary of the Fungi. 10 edn. CAB
       International, Wallingford, 771 pp.

    LAGANÀ A., SALERNI E., BARLUZZI C., PERINI C., DE DOMINICIS V. (2000). Mycocoenology in Abies
      alba Miller woods of Central-Southern Tuscany (Italy). Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae, 69 (4),
      293-298.

    LAGANÀ A., ANGIOLINI C., LOPPI S., SALERNI E., PERINI C., BARLUZZI C., DE DOMINICIS V. (2002).
      Periodicity, fluctuations and successions of macrofungi in fir forests (Abies alba Miller) in Tuscany,
      Italy. Forest Ecology and Management, 169, 187-202.

    MAGURRAN AE. (2004). Measuring Biological Diversity. Blackwell. 256 pp.

    O’HANLON R., HARRINGTON T.J. (2012). Macrofungal diversity and ecology in four Irish forest type.
      Fungal Ecology, 5, 499-508.

    ONOFRI S., BERNICCHIA A., FILIPELLO V., PADOVAN F., PERINI C., RIPA C., SALERNI E., SAVINO E.,
      VENTURELLA G., VIZZINI A., ZOTTI M., ZUCCONI L. (2005). Checklist dei funghi italiani - Checklist of
      Italian fungi: Basidiomycetes, Basidiomycota. Carlo Delfino Editore, Sassari, 380 pp.

    ORTEGA A., LORITE J. (2007). Macrofungi diversity in Cork-Oak and Holm-Oak forests in Andalusia
      (southern Spain): an efficient parameter for establishing priorities for its evaluation and conservation.
      Central European Journal of Biology 2(2):1-27.

    ORTON PD. (1986). Fungi of northern pine and birch woods. Bull. Br. Mycol. Soc. 20: 130-144.

    OKSANEN J., BLANCHET F.G., KINDT R., LEGENDRE P., MINCHIN P.R., O'HARA R.B., SIMPSON G.L.,
      SOLYMOS P., STEVENS M.H.H., WAGNER H. (2013) Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package
      version 2.0-7. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan

    PASSINO A.M. (1981). I suoli su substrati acidi in Sardegna. Annali della facoltà di agraria dell’Università
      di Sassari. Studi Sassaresi. Gallizi Sassari. Sezione III, Volume XXVIII. 1-9 pp.

    PAUTASSO M., ZOTTI M. (2009). Macrofungal taxa and human population in Italy’s region. Biodiversity
      and Conservation 18:473-485.

    PECORARO L., PERINI C., SALERNI E., DE DOMINICIS V. (2007). Contribution to the knowledge of the
      mycological flora of the Pigelleto Nature Reserve, Mt. Amiata (Italy). Flora Mediterranea, 17, 143-163.

    PERINI C., BARLUZZI C., COMANDINI O., DE DOMINICIS V. (1995). Mycocoenological research in fir
      woods in Tuscany (Italy). Doc. Myc., 25, 317-336.

    PIELOU E.C. (1969). An introduction to mathematical ecology. New York: Wiley.

    PIELOU E.C. (1975). Ecology diversity. New York: Wiley InterScience.

    R Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for
      Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http:// www.R-project.org

    RIVAS-MARTINEZ S. (2008). Global Bioclimatics (Classificación Bioclimática de la Tierra). Versión 27-
       08-2004. www.globalbioclimatics.org/book/bioc/global_bioclimatics_9.htm

    SALERNI E., PERINI C. (2010). Macrofungal communities in Italian fir woods – short-term effects of
      silvicolture and its implication for conservation. Cryptogamie mycologie, 31(3), 251-283.

    10
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.        Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

   SANTI E., MACCHERINI S., ROCCHINI D., BONINI I., BRUNIALTI G., FAVILLI L., PERINI C., PEZZO F.,
     PIAZZINO S., ROTA E.,et.al., (2010). Simple to sample: vascular plants as surrogate group in a nature
     reserve. Journal for Nature Conservation 18: 2-11.

   SHANNON C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27:
     379-423, 623-656.

   SIMPSON E.H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. Nature 163, 688 pp.

   TÓTH B.B., BARTA Z. (2010). Ecological studies of ectomycorrhizal fungi: an analysis of survey methods.
     Fungal Divers., 45, 3-19.

   VENTURELLA G., ALTOBELLI E., BERNICCHIA A., DI PIAZZA S., DONNINI D., GARGANO M.L., GORJÓN
     S.P., GRANITO V.M., LANTIERI A., LUNGHINI D., et al., (2011). Fungal biodiversity and in situ
     conservation in Italy. Plant Biosystems, 145(4), 950-957.

   VILLENEUVE N., GRANDTNER M.M., FORTIN J.A. (1989). Frequency and diversity of ectomycorrhizal and
      saprophytic macrofungi in the Laurentide Mountains of Quebec. Canadian Journal of Botany 67:2616-
      2629.

   VILLENEUVE N., GRANDTNER M.M., FORTIN J.A. (1991a). The coenological organization of
      ectomycorrhizal macrofungi in Laurentide Mountains of Quebec. Can. J. Bot. 69:2215-2224.

   VILLENEUVE N., GRANDTNER M.M., FORTIN J.A. (1991b). The study of macrofungal communities:
      defining adequate sampling units by means of cluster analysis. Vegatatio 94:125-132.

   ZAK J.C., WILLIG M. (2004). Fungal biodiversity patterns. In Mueller G.M., Bills G.F., Foster M.S., 2004.
     Biodiversity of fungi – inventory and monitoring methods. Elsevier Academic Press.

   ZOTTI M., ZAPPATORE S. (2006). Mycodiversity in beech woods of Western Liguria (Italy). Plant
     Biosystems 140 (1): 27-33.

   ZOTTI M., DI PIAZZA S., AMBROSIO E., MARIOTTI M.G., ROCCOTIELLO E., VIZZINI A. (2013a).
     Macrofungal diversity in Pinus plantations in Northwest Italy (Liguria). Sydowia 65(2):223-243.

   ZOTTI M., DI PIAZZA S., AMBROSIO E., PAVARINO M., MARIOTTI M.G. (2013b). Metodo di
     campionamento standardizzato per la valutazione della micodiversità in boschi di pino nero della
     Liguria. 108° Congresso della Società Italiana Onlus (SBI), Baselga di Pinè, Italy 18-20 Settembre
     2013. Pg. 158.




                                                                                                         11
                                   E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.              Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
                                   Franceschini, M. Zotti
                                   DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

Tab. 1: List of the recorded species. For each taxon is given the number of sporomata per each plot. Total number of sporomata per species is indicated in the first of the right hand
column, the species SCVI in the final column. The last line reports total number of sporomata per plot.
Tab. 1: Elenco delle specie censite nell’area di studio. Per ogni taxon sono riportati il rispettivo numero di sporomi totale e quello rilevato in ogni plot. Nell’ultima colonna a destra
sono riportati i valori SCVI assegnati ad ogni singola specie.
                                         Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot    Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot   Plot
Species name                                                                                                                                                                          Tot   SCVI
                                         1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9       10     11     12     13     14     15     16     17     18     19     20
Agaricus porphyrizon P.D. Orton                                             1                            5                                  1                                         7     5
Amanita gemmata (Fr.) Bertill.                                                                                                                                                 2      2     2
Amanita muscaria (L.) Lam.                             5             3      3                    1                     2                                  1                           15    2
Amanita rubescens Pers                          1      1                                                 2                                                                     1      5     2
Amanita vaginata (Bull.) Lam.                                 1      1                                                        2                                                       4     4
Baeospora myosura (Fr.) Singe            1                                         2      4                            1                                                              8     3
Chroogomphus rutilus (Schaeff.) O.K.
                                                2      1                                                 3                                  1                                         7     3
Mill.
Clitocybe phaeophthalma (Pers.)
                                                                            3                                                                                                         3     4
Kuyper
Clitopilus prunulus (Scop.) P. Kumm.            5             10     8      5                    2              20            15                                 3                    68    3
Crepidotus variabilis (Pers.) P.
                                         2      10                                                              30                                 10                                 52    2
Kumm.
Cystoderma carcharias (Pers.) Fayod                                                                                                  2                                                2     5
Gymnopus dryophilus (Bull.) Murrill                                                5                                                                                                  5     2
Gymnopus fusipes (Bull.) Gray            2                                                                                                                                            2     4
Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca (Wulfen)
                                                       5             2      15     3                     10                   3             10     3      2                           53    2
Maire
Hygrophorus hypothejus (Fr.) Fr.                                                                                                                   2                    2             4     3
Hymenopellis radicata (Relhan) R.H.
                                                              20                                 3                     4                                                2             29    4
Petersen
Hypholoma fasciculare (Huds.) P.
                                         10                                        5             3                                          30                                        48    2
Kumm.




12
                                    E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.       Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN 2465-311X
                                    Franceschini, M. Zotti
                                    DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

Tab. 1 (Continues)
Infundibulicybe geotropa (Bull.)
                                         5                                                                                                                    5    4
Harmaja
Inocybe calamistrata (Fr.) Gillet                          5                                                                                                  5    5
Inocybe geophylla (Bull.) P. Kumm.                   3                                               2                              10    3       2           20   2
Inocybe rimosa (Bull.) P. Kumm.                1                                                                                                              1    3
Inocybe splendens R. Heim                                                                            5                                                        5    5
Laccaria laccata (Scop.) Cooke                 2     2                       3             8               1                  6                   5           27   2
Lactarius aurantiacus (Pers.) Gray                                                                                                                        2   2    3
Lactarius deliciosus (L.) Gray                       15                            2                       3                        10                        30   2
Lactarius quieticolor Romagn.                              2                 5             4                                        2                 2       15   5
Lactarius rufus (Scop.) Fr.                                                                                       8                                           8    3
Lepista flaccida (Sowerby) Pat.                2                       2           20                             6                                       1   31   2
Lepista nuda (Bull.) Cooke                     4                 1                                                                        2                   7    2
Leratiomyces squamosus (Pers.)
                                                                                                                  1                                       1   5
Bridge & Spooner
Lycoperdon perlatum Pers.                                                          10                                               3     7                   20   2
Mycena epipterygia (Scop.) Gray                                              1                                                                                1    3
Mycena filopes (Bull.) P. Kumm.                                  2                                                                                            2    3
Mycena inclinata (Fr.) Quél.                                                               2                                                                  2    4
Mycena metata (Secr. ex Fr.) P.
                                                     2                                                                                                        2    3
Kumm.
Mycena pura (Pers.) P. Kumm.             1                                                                                                                    1    2
Rhodocollybia butyracea (Bull.)
                                               2                             1                       3                        10                              16   3
Lennox
Russula caerulea Fr.                                                                                                                                  1       1    3
Russula chloroides (Krombh.) Bres.             1                       2                                                                                      3    4
Russula maculata Quél.                                                                                                                    1                   1    4
Russula nigricans Fr.                    5                                                                                                                    5    2



                                                                                                                                                                   13
                                     E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.            Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN ISSN 2465-311X
                                     Franceschini, M. Zotti
                                     DOI: 10.6092/issn.2465-311X/5587

Tab.1 (Continues)
Russula risigallina (Batsch) Sacc.                                                               2                                                                        2     2
Russula sanguinea Fr.                                                                                                                                             2       2     4
Russula sardonia Fr.                              1                         8      3        15   5       3                  3           2           2                     42    2
Russula xerampelina (Schaeff.) Fr.                                                                                                                                    1   1     2
Stropharia caerulea Kreisel                                                                                                                                  1            1     4
Suillus granulatus (L.) Roussel            2                                                                                                  2     1                     5     2
Tricholoma bresadolanum Clémençon                                                  1                           3                  2                                   1   7     5
Tricholoma imbricatum (Fr.) P.
                                                               1                                                                                                          1     4
Kumm.
Tricholoma pessundatum (Fr.) Quél.                                                               3                                                                        3     2
Tricholoma ustale (Fr.) P. Kumm.                                      2                                                                                                   2     4
Tubaria furfuracea (Pers.) Gillet                                                                                     15                                                  15    4
Total                                      28     31    34     39     19    39     29       51   33      23    63     26    37    5     60    42    19       11   9   8   606   3.13




14
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.     Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: _ _ _ _ _ _




        Fig. 4: Amanita rubescens. Photo by R. Brotzu.




       Fig. 5: Amanita vaginata. Photo by R. Brotzu


                                                                                                      15
E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.        Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Franceschini, M. Zotti
DOI: _ _ _ _ _ _




        Fig. 6: Crepidotus variabilis. Photo by R. Brotzu




       Fig. 7: Inocybe geophylla. Photo by A. Brigo.




 16
    E. Ambrosio, E. Lancellotti, R. Brotzu, H. Salch, A.       Micologia Italiana vol. 44 (2015) ISSN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
    Franceschini, M. Zotti
    DOI: _ _ _ _ _ _




           Fig. 8: Lactarius deliciosus. Photo by R. Brotzu.




           Fig. 9: Lycoperdon perlatum. Photo by R. Brotzu
1

                                                                                                            17
