A complete list of all alien taxa ever recorded in the flora of the Czech Republic is presented as an update of the original checklist published in 2002. New data accumulated in the last decade are incorporated and the listing and status of some taxa are reassessed based on improved knowledge. Alien flora of the Czech Republic consists of 1454 taxa listed with information on their taxonomic position, life history, geographic origin (or mode of origin, distinguishing anecophyte and hybrid), invasive status (casual; naturalized but not invasive; invasive), residence time status (archaeophyte vs neophyte), mode of introduction into the country (accidental, deliberate), and date of the first record. Additional information on species performance that was not part of the previous catalogue, i.e. on the width of species’ habitat niches, their dominance in invaded communities, and impact, is provided. The Czech alien flora consists of 350 (24.1%) archaeophytes and 1104 (75.9%) neophytes. The increase in the total number of taxa compared to the previous catalogue (1378) is due to addition of 151 taxa and removal of 75 (39 archaeophytes and 36 neophytes), important part of the latter being the reclassification of 41 taxa as native, mostly based on archaeobotanical evidence. The additions represent taxa newly recorded since 2002 and reported in the national literature; taxa resulting from investigation of sources omitted while preparing the previous catalogue; redetermination of previously reported taxa; reassessment of some taxa traditionally considered native for which the evidence suggests the opposite; and inclusion of intraspecific taxa previously not recognized in the flora. There are 44 taxa on the list that are reported in the present study for the first time as aliens introduced to the Czech Republic or escaped from cultivation: Abies concolor, A. grandis, A. nordmanniana, Avena sterilis subsp. ludoviciana, A. ×vilis, Berberis julianae, B. thunbergii, Bidens ferulifolius, Buddleja alternifolia, Buglossoides incrassata subsp. splitgerberi, Buxus sempervirens, Corispermum declinatum, Cotoneaster dielsianus, C. divaricatus, Euphorbia myrsinites, Gleditsia triacanthos, Helleborus orientalis, Hieracium heldreichii, Koelreuteria paniculata, Lonicera periclymenum, Lotus ornithopodioides, Malus baccata, M. pumila, Miscanthus sacchariflorus, Morus alba, Muscari armeniacum, Paeonia lactiflora, Pennisetum alopecuroides, Pinguicula crystallina subsp. hirtiflora, P. grandiflora subsp. rosea, Podophyllum hexandrum, Pyracantha coccinea, Rhodotypos scandens, Rumex patientia × R. tianschanicus ‘Uteuša’, Salix cordata, Sarracenia purpurea, Sasa palmata ‘Nebulosa’, Scolymus maculatus, Spiraea japonica, Tagetes tenuifolia, Thuja occidentalis, Trifolium badium, Vaccinium corymbosum and Viburnum rhytidophyllum. All added and deleted taxa are commented on. Of the total number of taxa, 985 are classified as casuals, 408 as naturalized but not invasive, and 61 as invasive. The reduction in the number of invasive taxa compared to the previous catalogue is due to a more conservative approach adopted here; only taxa that currently spread are considered invasive. Casual taxa are strongly overrepresented among neophytes compared to archaeophytes (76.7% vs 39.4%), while naturalized but non-invasive taxa follow the reversed pattern (18.8% vs 57.4). However, these two groups do not significantly differ in the proportion of invasive taxa. Of introduced neophytes, 250 taxa (22.6%) are considered vanished, i.e. no longer present in the flora, while 23.3% became naturalized, and 4.5% invasive. In addition to the traditional classification based on introduction–naturalization–invasion continuum, taxa were classified into 18 population groups based on their long-term trends in metapopulation dynamics in the country, current state of their populations, and link to the propagule pressure from cultivation. Mapping these population groups onto the unified framework for biological invasions introduced by Blackburn et al. in 2011 made it possible to quantify invasion failures, and boom-and-busts, in the Czech alien flora. Depending on inclusion criteria (whether or not extinct/vanished taxa and hybrids are considered), alien taxa ever recorded in the Czech Republic contribute 29.7–33.1% to the total country’s plant diversity; taking into account only naturalized taxa, a permanent element of the country’s flora, the figure is 14.4–17.5%. Analysis of the dates of the first record, known for 771 neophytes, indicates that alien taxa in the flora have been increasing at a steady pace without any distinct deceleration trend; by extrapolating this data to all 1104 neophytes recorded it is predicted that the projected number would reach 1264 in 2050. Deliberate introduction was involved in 747 cases (51.4%), the remaining 48.6% of taxa are assumed to have arrived by unintentional pathways. Archaeophytes are more abundant in landscapes, occupy on average a wider range of habitat types than neophytes, but reach a lower cover in plant communities. The alien flora is further analysed with respect to representation of genera and families, origin and life history. and Nevejdou se dvě poslední jména autorů
Based on a combination of data from the Czech National Phytosociological Database and expert knowledge, a database of vascular plant species pools for 88 habitats, representative of the diversity of Czech vegetation, was compiled. This database contains 1820 native species, 249 archaeophytes and 278 neophytes, each assigned to one or more habitats. Besides the data on species occurrence in different habitats, the database contains information on a species’ ecological optimum in the habitat or its dominance. The largest pools of native species were found in rather rare habitats of dry and warm herbaceous or woody habitats at low altitudes, some of which contain > 530 species (maximum of 695 species for thermophilous forest fringes). These were followed by common habitats on mesic soils. The smallest pools of native species were in saline, aquatic and bog habitats ( 350 native species always contained > 5 archaeophytes and > 5 neophytes, and often many more. Two hundred and thirty two native species, 18 archaeophytes and 30 neophytes were identified as potential dominants in at least one habitat. However, potentially dominant species made up less than 3% of the species pool for 78 out of 88 habitats. Larger percentages (up to 14.6%) of potential dominants were included in habitats with small species pools and species-poor stands (e.g., aquatic, saline and mire habitats). The number of habitats in which a species occurred was used as a measure of its ecological range. Most ecological generalists were found among the native species, less among the archaeophytes and least among the neophytes. Out of the 36 species that occur as dominants in three or more habitats, 34 were native (many are grasses), onewas an archaeophyte (Cirsium arvense) and one was a neophyte (Impatiens parviflora).