Preslia, Praha, 74: 97–186, 2002

97

Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic
Katalog zavlečených druhů flóry České republiky

Petr P y š e k , Jiří S á d l o & Bohumil M a n d á k
The first author dedicates this paper to the memory of his father Antonín Pyšek

Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ-252 43 Průhonice, Czech Republic, e-mail: pysek@ibot.cas.cz
Pyšek P., Sádlo J. & Mandák B. (2002): Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic. – Preslia, Praha, 74: 97–186. Alien flora of the Czech Republic is presented. In Appendix 1, 1378 alien taxa (33.4% of the total flora) are listed with information on the taxonomic position, origin, invasive status (casual, naturalized, invasive; a new category post-invasive is introduced), time of immigration (archaeophytes vs. neophytes), habitat type invaded (natural, seminatural, human-made), vegetation invaded (expressed as occurence in phytosociological alliances), mode of introduction into the country (accidental, deliberate), and date of the first record. Number of phytogeographical as well as biological and ecological attributes were compiled for each species in the database; its structure is presented in Appendix 2 as a suggestion for similar work elsewhere. Czech alien flora consists of 24.1% of taxa which arrived before 1500 (archaeophytes) and 75.9% neophytes. There are 891 casuals, 397 naturalized and 90 invasive species. Of introduced neophytes, 21.9% became naturalized, and 6.6% invasive. Hybrids contribute with 13.3% to the total number of aliens, and the hybridization is more frequent in archaeophytes (18.7%) than in neophytes (11.7%). If the 184 hybrids are excluded from the total number of aliens, there are 270 archaeophytes and 924 neophytes in the Czech flora, i.e. total of 1195 taxa. Accidental arrivals account for 53.4% of all taxa and deliberate introduction for 46.6%; the ratio is reversed for neophytes considered separately (45.5 vs. 54.5%). Majority of aliens (62.8%) are confined to human-made habitats, 11.0% were recorded exclusively in natural or seminatural habitats, and 26.2% occur in both types of habitat. Archaeophytes and neophytes occur in 66 and 83 alliances, respectively, of the phytosociological system. Flora is further analysed with respect to origin, life histories, life forms and strategies. Only 310 species (22.4% of the total number of all alien taxa) are common or locally abundant; others are rare, based on a single locality or no longer present. The following 19 taxa are reported as new for the Czech alien flora: Agrostis scabra, Alhagi pseudalhagi, Allium atropurpureum, Bromus hordeaceus subsp. pseudothominii, Carduus tenuiflorus, Centaurea ×gerstlaueri, Centaurea nigra × phrygia, Cerastium ×maureri, Gilia capitata, Helianthus strumosus, Hieracium pannosum, Hordeum leporinum, Oenothera coronifera, Papaver atlanticum subsp. mesatlanticum, Parietaria pennsylvanica, Polypogon fugax, Rodgersia aesculifolia, Sedum pallidum var. bithynicum, Sedum stoloniferum; these represent results of our own field research as well as of herbaria search, and unpublished data from colleagues. Other 44 taxa are reported as escaping from cultivation for the first time. Twenty two archaeophytes are listed in the Red List of the Czech flora. K e y w o r d s : Alien flora, complete list of taxa, immigration status, casual, naturalized, invasive, time of immigration, abundance, mode of introduction, habitat type, hybridization, life history, life form, life strategy, taxonomy, species characteristics, Czech Republic

Introduction The core of modern research in plant invasions is in ecological studies, fuelled by an effort to predict invasiveness of particular species and vulnerability of various communities to

98

Preslia 74: 97–186, 2002

invasions. In the last decade, the field became fully comparable with other areas of modern ecology and “hard theories“ appear to emerge (Rejmánek 1996, Rejmánek & Richardson 1996, Lonsdale 1999). The focus on ecology reflects the fact that studies on invasions are among biological disciplines with the strongest practical appeal and recently, this aspect has become its focal point. Papers devoted to impact and its quantitative description as well as to critical evaluation of prediction possibilities have been published recently (e.g. Daehler & Carino 2000, Williamson 1996, 1999, 2001, Kolar & Lodge 2001, Pyšek 2001). Debate on risks associated with GMOs as a subset of potentially invasive taxa further increases practical importance of the field (Regal 1986, Kowarik 2002). Nevertheless, despite increasing focus on experimental approaches papers comparing species lists are a popular and useful tool, especially for generating hypotheses which can be then tested by experimental and comparative methods (Weber 1997, Daehler 1998). Importance of taxonomy for studies of alien flora has been repeatedly stressed and awareness of this has been increasing, too (McNeely 2001). In a field like this, where species move dynamically over the globe and one of the frequent and basic situations workers have to face is determination of a species new to their region, and often coming from distant areas, quality background data are needed. Having a reliable database of alien species of a given territory, summarizing historical knowledge of generations of botanists, may therefore prove as a very useful tool. Some information on alien floras is available for many European countries (see e.g. Weber 1997), although the quality of such data is highly variable. Generally, there is a remarkable difference between data drawn from standard floras and checklists commenting on species immigration status and studies focussing specifically on alien plants. Williamson (2002) has shown for the British flora how careful one must be when trying to make conclusions about the number of native species; numbers of aliens are undoubtedly even more difficult to estimate. Particular sources often give very different figures (Williamson 2002). In Europe, the best available data on alien flora, in terms of completeness of the species list, is that of the British Isles (Clement & Foster 1994, Ryves et al. 1996). This data set, in association with databases of biological attributes available for British flora (Fitter & Peat 1994) and geographical information, proved to be a powerful tool and yielded interesting results explaining the pattern of alien floras (Crawley et al. 1996). A comprehensive list of alien species with floristic status, degree of naturalization, date and mode of introduction, and chorological, biological and ecological data will be soon available for Germany (Kuehn & Klotz 2002). Moreover, detailed information on the structure and composition of alien flora, its historical dynamics and factors underlying its development have been available for Germany, too (see Kowarik 2002 and references therein). Switzerland is another European country with solid information on its alien flora (Weber 1999), and a project on this topic has started in Italy (Celesti Grapow, pers. com.). For Poland, a detailed information is available for a subset of alien species, i.e. archaeophytes (Zajac 1979). Detailed alien floras have been published for number of large European cities which are recognized as extremely species-rich centres of aliens (Pyšek 1998a), but complete catalogues of alien species for particular countries are still rather rare, unlike in other parts of the world more affected by plant invasions (e.g. Wells 1986 for South Africa).

Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic

99

Geographical conditions in the Czech Republic, history of human colonization and its relevance to plant invasions The Czech Republic covers an area of 78, 864 square kilometers and has 10.3 million inhabitants, creating a human population density of 131 inhabitants per km2. The network of roads (0.71 km per km2) and railways (0.11 km per km2) is rather dense. These features certainly contribute to the richness of alien flora (Pyšek & Prach 2002). Several historical and geographical factors have significantly affected the course of human-induced plant invasions over the past 6 000 years: 1. The Czech Republic is an ecotone between large continental landscape sections: the Alps on the south, Carpathians on the east, Pannonian basin located southeast, region of oceanic climatic on the west, and the north-located region of low habitat diversity resulting from the Quarternary glaciation. There are number of natural and human-created migration routes which provide possibilities for colonization; these are oriented E-W, and SE-NW. Many species reach their northwestern distribution limits near SE political boundaries of the Czech Republic (Slavík 1988). 2. Compared to similar regions of Central and Western Europe, the landscape mosaic is diverse and remarkably heterogeneous in the Czech Republic. Diverse geological, soil and climatic conditions create suitable environments for many different types of plants (Hejný & Slavík 1988), and the majority of Central-European habitat types are present (except for coastal and alpine habitats). The human impact and types of land-use are also rather heterogeneous, both on historical time scale and recently. 3. The dynamics of plant migrations are similar to those in other central- and western-European regions; there has been a continuous stream of plant invasions since the Neolithic agricultural colonization which started in about 5300 B. C. and represented the first milestone in the history of alien plant invasions. The main landscape changes that accompanied particular plant invasion waves followed during the Aeneolite (3800 B. C.), Bronze Age (2200 B. C.) (Opravil 1980), Medieval (13th to 15th century), and recent time (since the 19th century). As early as the Aeneolite, there was a rather high proportion of deforested landscape in lowlands (Ložek 1999), and divergent development dividing the landscape into warm cultural lowlands and cold forested highlands started during this period. The landscape was gradually colonized between the Neolithic period (Central Bohemia, South Moravia) and the Medieval (cold highlands), but the highest mountains were only colonized between the 17th to 19th century. Until the Late Medieval, there were still large portions of closed forests and these acted as barriers to migrations. 4. There was little and very local exchange of goods until the beginning of the Late Medieval. Not until this period were there developed towns and large scale migration of humans and goods (Le Gof 1982), although trading routes specialized on salt, gold and amber were used in prehistoric times. The industrial revolution started in the region in 1850s and in the first half of the 20th century, the Czech Republic was one of the most highly developed industrial countries in Europe. In 1945–1989 the country was isolated from the Western Europe because of the socialistic political regime which brought about economic orientation towards the East and specific features of land-use (including so-called “collectivization”, involving the concentration of agricultural production into large production units, and the evacuation of border areas and their subsequent colonization). Many plant species of Asian and southeast-European origin entered the

Surprisingly. Domin 1917–1919). as well as on their ecology and impact (see Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998). Floristic research in the territory of the Czech Republic dates back to the second half of the 18th century. Pyšek 1995a. (iii) environmental stress associated with traditional agricultural management has been decreasing. the country went through the same process as other European regions between the 1940s and 1990s. the wealth of information on alien plants can be found in the remarkable work of Čelakovský (1867–1881. The first attempt at producing the flora of the whole Czechia was carried out by Schmidt (1793–1794). Laus 1908. Sádlo & Storch 2000). 1882–1894) who recognized the alien status and origin of some plants present in the Czech flora and commented in considerable detail on their distribution. 2002 central part of the continent via one of the largest European railway stations in Čierna nad Tisou in the Slovak part of the former Czechoslovakia (Jehlík & Hejný 1974. Research triggered then has focussed on specific habitats (ports.100 Preslia 74: 97–186. unfortunately. oilseed or wool processing factories. In addition to this primary research. in the 1960s. Alien plants started to be systematically recorded. mills. In the early 20th century botanists started to recognize human-made and disturbed habitats as a source of important additions to native floras (e. 1973. In the first half of the 19th century. 1988). For the following period. despite this background. (iv) the role of disturbances associated with industrial activities and urbanization increases. unfortunately some data given by him are doubtful (Skalický et al. rubbish tips. Opiz 1823.g. The tradition of recording plant distribution made it possible to produce some valuable data sets providing detailed information on distribution of selected alien species (e. river traffic on the Elbe river. This landscape model can be characterized by the following features in the Czech Republic: (i) humans are less present in the open landscape. several floral works mention introduced plants and can be therefore used to infer information about plant invasions at that time (Pohl 1809. grain silos. the Danube river and their tributaries significantly contributed to the richness of present alien flora (Jehlík1998). valuable floristic information about species immigration status can be derived by a careful analysis of old floral works. Despite isolation and political differences. History of floristic research and its relevance to studies on alien species The remarkable tradition of studies on floristics in the Czech Republic provides a solid background for compiling a list of alien species of reasonable historival relevance. 5. 1852). etc.). no comprehensive catalogue of alien plants occurring at the territory of the country has been available until now. and (v) so do the migration possibilities (Cílek 1999. taxonomically relevant groups and on the distribution of alien plants.g. A new landscape type came to a large-scale existence since the 1990s. some of which date to 1600 (Hendrych 2001). railways. (ii) direct human intervention into the landscape are less frequent but more powerful. they were not always adequately analyzed. Jehlík 1986. 1998 for references). thanks to the founding of a specialized research section at the Institute of Botany. arable land. The need for such a list has become more urgent as the research in plant invasions has been intensifying (Pyšek & . Presl & Presl 1819. Besides railways and roads. Průhonice. Jehlík 1998). Traditional economical and land-use models based on Neolithic scheme have ceased (Hobsbawm 1991).

Different reliability of data in earlier floras is not the only reason for need to update lists of aliens of a given territory. Lupinus perennis. the value of Jaccard coefficient of similarity between the two data sets is as low as 0. The 599 taxa listed by Dostál represent approximately 20% of the the flora (the total number of species was 3120. Ptelea trifoliata). Linaria purpurea. the difference between the recent and former data sets is too big to be attributed only to such an explanation and indicates lower reliability of the earlier data. much of which is not covered in international abstracting journals. 2002) reflecting accelerated translocation of species over the Earth surface in the second half of the 20th century. The species number in this larger region should be therefore higher. such records are thus generally unavailable to international readers. Moreover. Acer tataricum. Of the neophytes reported in this flora. publication of such works usually spans over a considerable time period. Erysimum perofskianum). Plant invasions are. the Dostál’s data set was for the territory of former Czechoslovakia which includes Slovakia. Potentilla norvegica). Helianthus debilis. this fact influences the comparison of past and present alien floras in two contrasting ways: species introduced only to Slovakia are missing from the present data referring only to the Czech Republic but there are taxa whose native distribution ends in Slovakia and their occurrence in the Czech Republic is therefore secondary (e. The flora of Dostál (1948–1950) which became a modern standard for Czech botanists of the second half of the 20th century gives an indication of alien origin of 599 taxa. and only as few as 490 are common with the Dostál’s flora. Capsella rubella.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 101 Prach 2002). Slavík 1995–2000) is no exception in this respect. 1958) on which the importance of the reliability of the data can be demonstrated. Cuscuta australis. it is uncertain whether or not they ever escape from cultivation (e. or. Plantago indica. 109 were excluded from the present list for various reasons: they were re-classified as native (e. Silene viridiflora). reported erroneously as they probably never grew at the territory of the country (e. Pulsatilla slavica. as Dostál did not consider archaeophytes as aliens. Until now. The Flora of the Czech Republic (Hejný & Slavík 1988–1992. Even if we take into account the increase in the number of aliens in the Czech flora during the last four decades (Pyšek et al. which number reflects better the real situation. extremely dynamic. by their very nature. data for the territory of the Czech Republic used to be taken mostly from the work of Dostál (1948–1950. most frequently.Pyšek et al. The reasons are that any such work must necessarily rely upon many contributors who feel differently about nonindigeneous members of floras. a decade in the contemporary world is a lifetime in plant invasions! . Trifolium angulatum.g. Such taxa did not appear among aliens on Dostál’s list but are included on the present one. Dostál 1954). However. Records of these newcomers are usually scattered in the local literature. Given that there are 924 neophytes (excluding hybrids) listed in the present paper. 1954.g. An attempt to compile a list for any territory brings data to light which would otherwise be lost. and also.g. This phenomenon certainly deserves more attention and careful analysis since the data from Dostál’s flora were taken as a basis for comparison with other regions (Pyšek 1989) because there was no other source available. Cotinus coggygria. Orobanche gracilis. and there is a constant influx of new species. and comparative studies on alien floras started to receive considerable attention (Weber 1997). Solanum alatum. the quality of information and the attention paid namely to casual aliens varies.g.47. Mesembryanthemum crystallinum. The vast majority of the taxa are neophytes. Scutellaria altissima. Even very good and detailed floras do not pay the same attention to alien species. Beckmannia eruciformis. However.

history of introduction (Hejný et al. General information on biological and ecological attributes was further completed by using synthetic floral works from other regions (Tutin et al. Terminology. For other information not given in these sources. The list of Opravil (1980) served as a basic source on residence time for species introduced before 1500. Databases specifically focussed on alien species have an advantage. We also used herbaria (mostly National Museum Prague – PR. another important aspect is the kind of information associated with particular taxa on the list. Stace 1991). its invasive status (Richardson et al. 1995–2000. Pyšek 1995b. unpublished information from colleagues. All alien species ever recorded at the territory of the country at least once in the wild were included1. 1987). . Earlier modern floral works from the second half of the 20th century were also critically evaluated (notably Dostál 1948–1950. endangernment and conservation status (Holub & Procházka 2000). in association with historical dynamics and role it plays in the landscape. knowledge of species ecology and habitats occupied was used. seed bank formation (Thompson et al. each particular taxon was carefully re-assessed to confirm its native/alien status (Webb 1985. Cullen et al.102 Preslia 74: 97–186. and specialized compendia on chromosome numbers and ploidy levels (Májovský et al. Brickell 1989). Charles Univeristy – PRC. 1964–1980. Another important condition for inclusion was that a species is alien to the 1 Only those species which occurred in the wild were considered. and Institute of Botany Průhonice – PRA). 2000) and residence time. 1984–1989. 1973. germination outside such space was considered as escape from cultivation. 1989). it can be rather tricky to decide. Frank & Klotz 1990. Richardson et al. outside the flower bed or garden). dormancy and germination behaviour (Baskin & Baskin 1999). Data sources The work “Flora of the Czech Republic”. 1987). 2002) was also checked for the coverage of alien species. 2000). invasive behaviour elsewhere in the world (Clement & Foster 1994. Jehlík 1998). A plant reproducing clonally was considered as an escape from cultivation only if it survived winter and persisted in a given site until the following growing period. Lhotská et al. 1997). dispersal mode (Lhotská & Chrtková 1978. 1958.e. and results of our own field research in 1999–2001. 2002 A good species list is clearly the prime task of such a work.e. In some cases. Ryves et al. The knowledge of landscape history since Neolithic times was also employed (Ložek 1999). In plants reproducing by seed. we searched the primary literature (see References). i. We adopted the following criterion: a plant was included on the list if it reproduced on its own at least once outside the space where it was sown or planted (i. Kartesz & Meacham 1999). this concerns especially plants thrown away from gardens. served as a general information source for that part of the flora which has been covered so far (Hejný & Slavík 1988–1992. 1954. compared to standard floras. of which 6 out of 8 planned volumes have been published. Frank & Klotz 1990. For this evaluation. Slavík 1995–2000). approach. However. and classification measures Former floras and works related to plants non-native to the territory of the Czech Republic (see References) were considered when evaluating species status. 1996. we did not take into account those kept exclusively in cultivation but considered escapees. The newly prepared Key to the flora of the Czech Republic (Kubát et al. and planting and cultivation aspects (Walters et al. that such information can be compiled in a considerable detail (see Appendix 2).

archangelica from 1893 (leg.Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 103 Fig. . Presence of this neophyte at the territory of the Czech Republic has been proved as early as in 1517 (Slavík 1997). J. – Herbarium specimen of Angelica archangelica subsp. 1a. Koš ál PR).

This brings about a danger that most of what is not covered might be overlooked in the future. we adopted a conservative approach. its expansion into other communities did not qualify it for inclusion on the list. Holub & Jirásek 1967) was given. which are sometimes listed without evidence from one flora to another. the most recent addition to the alien flora (2001). this taxon is commonly planted and escapes from cultivation but its native occurrence in the Krkonoše Mts from the turn of the 19th and 20th century cannot be excluded (Kovanda in Hejný & Slavík 1992). once a species has native habitats in the Czech Republic.) Pers.104 Preslia 74: 97–186. Rejmánek et al. For that reason we included some records that are 2 Sorbus intermedia (Ehrh. Similarly. as opposed to one based on human values and relying on the realization of some form of “impact” (Davis & Thompson 2001). no consideration of so-called “apophytes” (native species occuring on secondary habitats. . it was not included onto the list. – Rodgersia aesculifolia. Daehler 2001. it is tempting for future researchers to start with that and pay less attention to scattered information sources from earlier times. is an example of such an approach. this species is not included in the list. archangelica and that of this species. 2000. 2002 Fig. was therefore adopted (Rejmánek 1995. 2002).g. whole territory of the country. If a species has or had a single locality at the territory of the country where it is considered native. once a declaratively complete work on alien flora of any territory has been published. Doubtful records. On the other hand. see e. were excluded. There is a span of more than four centuries and minimum 1044 species that have immigrated during the time between the introduction of Angelica archangelica subsp. Similarly. 1b. A strictly geographical approach to plant invasions. For that reason. species which occurred at the territory as native in the past were excluded2. Richardson et al.

its cultivars were produced and subsequently escape into the wild (e. We followed the scheme proposed by Richardson et al. C a s u a l a l i e n p l a n t s : Alien plants that may flourish and even reproduce occasionally in an area. var. i. 3 . and invasive aliens4. such species was not included on the list because at the taxonomic levels considered in the present paper. They are non-indigenous species in the sense of not having been at the territory before the onset of Neolithic agriculture (see also Williamson 2002). and do not necessarily invade natural. changes in a species’ invasive status. trichophylla. japonica vs. Crosses between natives and aliens are always considered as aliens. which describes the highest degree of invasiveness reached by a given species. For taxa which are covered by it. Hyoscyamus albus. I n v a s i v e p l a n t s : Naturalized plants that produce reproductive offspring.g. var. or creeping stems). through processes similar to those we witness today with neophytes. the only exceptions are Reynoutria japonica (var. The evaluation of the invasive status of a taxon. N a t u r a l i z e d p l a n t s : Alien plants that reproduce consistently (cf. but which do not form self-replacing populations. it might have represented native occurrence. stolons. the species is native to the neighbouring Germany so even if it was collected in Bohemia. has been reported as an adventive species of the Czech flora (Dostál 1989. the support for inclusion was considered too weak. Achillea ptarmica). There is no reason to doubt that archaeophytes went. After Richardson et al. make it probable that they were correctly determined (e. (2000).). If a native species was taken into cultivation.e. var. which is based on overcoming different kind of barriers an invading plant must face. naturalized. scoparia f. 2002). rhizomes. i. The following categories were distinguished: casuals. To avoid confusion. i. authorities are consistently given in Appendix 1. s. such as the personality of the author. often in very large numbers. it is too risky to include the species on the basis of second-hand information without precise location. picta). pers. For example. compacta).e. based on Chrtek 1965). the collector of this plant. we included another category which is supposed to reflect the historical dynamics.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 105 not steadfastly proved because the respective herbarium specimen is not available. after their introduction. species and subspecies. the nomenclature follows the determination key to the Czech flora (Kubát et al. however. casual alien plants) and sustain populations over more than one life cycle without direct intervention by humans (or in spite of human intervention). franchetii). (2000). and which rely on repeated introductions for their persistence. 4 A l i e n p l a n t s : Plant taxa in a given area whose presence there is due to intentional or accidental introduction as a result of human activity.e.d. tatula). com. semi-natural or human-made ecosystems. usually close to adult plants. however. > 6 m / 3 yrs for taxa spreading by roots. The record was based on a single herbarium specimen from the Zahlbrückner collection located in PRC (s. see Slavík 2000)3. Its unclear status is reflected by it being listed among “uncertain cases of extinct and missing” taxa of the Red list of the Czech flora (Holub & Procházka 2000).g.. We only distinguished taxa up to the intraspecific level of subspecies. and Kochia scoparia subsp. Datura stramonium (var. (2000). Nomenclature of higher taxa follows the Cronquist system as presented in Mabberley (1997). stramonium vs. and thus have the potential to spread over a considerable area.Pyšek et al. they often recruit offspring freely. Mibora minima (L. at considerable distances from parent plants (approximate scales: > 100 m / < 50 years for taxa spreading by seeds and other propagules. Physalis alkekengi (var. Hadinec. alkekengi vs. On top of the standard classification introduced by Richardson et al. The sheet bears location “E Bohemia: Pohl” in Zahlbrückner’s handwriting (J. should be a key point in any study dealing with alien floras. In addition. its stage in the “naturalization-invasion process”.) who was not. but other circumstances. Obviously. even if they have arisen in the Czech Republic. and that their recent distribution is in many cases only a remnant of In other cases.a. it is native in the territory (the only exception to this rule is rather common and well recognizable Phalaris arundinacea var.) Desv.

Cotoneaster horizontalis.e.e. they no longer spread (e. however.e. Some terms were introduced by original sources in a slightly different sense but their meaning has shifted since then. Lonicera tatarica. approx. based on our personal opinion. It should.) it is termed “cultivation relic” and indicated in Appendix 1. we distinguish archaeophytes (introduced before the discovery of America.) and neophytes (introduced after that date). we consider this term to be a useful and informative addition to the traditionally applied criteria of a species’ position within the dynamics of invasion process. 1500 A. Agrostemma githago. We used the system of Richardson et al.g. Discussion is required here on how these terms were used by previous authors. We made an attempt to take this into account by including a category “post-invasive”. With respect to the residence time. (2000) because: (a) it is simpler than traditional classification schemes. However. (c) The traditional Central-European classification of alien plants has never received notable recognition in English speaking scientific community. hence it is a candidate for becoming generally acceptable basis for terminology in plant invasions. Criteria for including archaeophytes as post-invasive were that the species now has a stable (not increasing) or even decreasing population and does not invade new. the terms “archaeophytes” and “neophytes” represent an exception in this respect (Williamson 2002). It only reflects the residence time (species introduced after the year 1500) regardless of the mean of introduction. and habitat transformation (e. deliberately introduced species are not neophytes in the sense of e. what means made it possible? Where does it invade. Elodea canadensis. more than any other. Kreh 1957. Examples include: Atriplex rosea. i. Potentilla fruticosa. rather than creating specific terms for each possible situation. Nonetheless. Rosa rugosa. or Gagea villosa (see Appendix 1). on the level of knowledge of species ecology 5 When did the species arrive? Why did it arrive. i. in which habitats? How far did it get in the invasion process? . Strictly speaking. Filipendula kamtschatica. Schroeder 1969) are traditionally used in Central-European countries. Pyšek 1995b). etc. Terminological frameworks for classifying alien species by reflecting their relationship to humans as vectors of introduction. 2002 the past abundance and distribution. Holub & Jirásek (1967) and should be termed “xenophytes”.g. Chenopodium polyspermum. this concerns species for which it is rather striking that. dispersal.e. we use it without any relation to whether the given species arrived accidentally or was brought in by humans. the time since the arrival of a species in the territory. modern types of habitats. (b) It is being partly recognized by international scientific bodies such as Global Invasive Species Programme (McNeely 2001). D. It differs in that it answers the basic classification questions5 by combining independent criteria. Holub & Jirásek 1967.. after having reached a distribution peak in the past. This is most remarkable in the usage of the term “neophyte”. more than elsewhere. For simplicity and compatibility with recent usage of the term.g. Mimulus guttatus.106 Preslia 74: 97–186. there are several categories. between which the distinction is sometimes blurred and depends. When a species occurs in the locality for a long time.g. i. they either retreated or their distribution is more or less stable – i. be borne in mind that the post-invasive category is. seemingly naturalized but it is there as a remnant of past planting (e. Spergula arvensis. still it is compatible with them (Table 1. it is therefore more speculative than the others. We also labelled some neophytes as post-invasive. Imperatoria ostruthium). but its population dynamics and type of occurrence suggests that it might have belonged to the vegetation dominants in the past. Thellung 1905.

The former is based on the classification of Holub & Jirásek (1967). 6 7 Approximate date corresponding to the discovery of America (1492). and (iv) naturalized or invasive when classifying the invasive status. . Oxalis debilis and O. currently occurring in the territory without need of human intervention accidentally (unintentionally) introduced accidentally introduced before ca. latifolia. both deliberately or accidentally) neophytes in human-made habitats (casual) neophytes in human-made habitats (naturalized or invasive) neophytes in natural and/or seminatural habitats (naturalized or invasive) and perception of landscape history. Term in Holub & Jirásek (1967) Anthropophytes I. Lohmeyer & Sukopp 1002) for this category which is sometimes further divided into „holoagriophytes“ (in natural vegetation) and „hemiagriophytes“ (in seminatural vegetation) (see e. Xenophytes 1. the outdoor climate of Central Europe does not permit their persistence. These include. M = means of introduction. 1500. both deliberately or accidentally) neophytes (introduced after ca. the latter on Richardson et al. Ergasiophytes 2. Ergasiophygophytes 3. This includes a decision whether a species is (i) native or archaeophyte.g. 15006 accidentally introduced after ca. too Corresponding term in the present paper and its meaning alien not included on the list deliberately introduced aliens (mostly casual) deliberately introduced aliens (naturalized or invasive) II. such species were considered as casuals because of their dependence on glasshouse environment. (2000).: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 107 Table. Kornas 1990). Ergasiolipophytes M MH MH MH Criteria Meaning introduced by humans regardless of time and means introduced deliberately kept only in cultivation kept in cultivation and occassionally escaping formerly planted. (ii) archaeophyte or neophyte. occurring in human-made habitats and penetrating to natural habitats. and (iii) casual or naturalized. 1. as long as residence time is concerned. 1500. – Comparison of terminology associated with alien plants which has been traditionally used in Central-European classification schemes with the one adopted for the present paper. Jehlík 1995). Criteria used by Holub & Jirásek (1967) for classification of particular categories are indicated: T = time of immigration.Pyšek et al. for example. H = type of encountered habitat. 1500 occurring temporarily in human-made habitats established in human-made habitats established in the region. Archaeophytes M MT 2. species which often spread in greenhouses of garden centres where they survive without being further dispersed by humans (Holub & Holubičková 1980. However. Some authors use the term “agriophytes“ (Schroeder 1969. Hemerophytes 1. Neophytes MT (a) Ephemerophytes (b) Epekophytes MTH MTH (c) Neoindigenophytes7 MTH any accidentally introduced alien archaeophytes (introduced before ca. Some special cases have been considered in the present paper too.

184 are hybrids. rare. Above 15. occurrence and behaviour of the species in the Czech Republic. 50–499. that this date tells us only that the species has been present in the territory since at least the given year. The database Various characteristics have been compiled for each species. 1852. The type of invaded vegetation was assessed by using alliances of the Zürich-Montpellier phytosociological system (Chytrý et al. such estimates even with solid data at . and (iv) biological and ecological attributes collated for each species (see Appendix 2 for details). and where it is highly improbable that the species would appear again. This figure can be used to estimate the contribution of aliens to the total floristic richness of the territory of the Czech Republic. 15–49. Of these. and (ii) industrial urban landscape (Hobsbawm 1991). How many species. distinguishing (i) traditional agricultural landscape. The type of invaded landscape was also evaluated. It shoud be noted. These can be divided into several topics: (i) species identity and taxonomic position. communication and human settlements). and at least 500 localities. these are regularly spread over the 19th century (Pohl 1809. Of the total number of taxa. However. how large a proportion? The Czech alien flora contains 1378 taxa belonging to 542 genera and 99 families (Appendix 1). where such information was available. for obvious reasons. 54 subspecies and 5 varieties are the only representatives of their species.108 Preslia 74: 97–186. Particular habitats in which the species is found were classified according to the Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1992). the number of localities is an estimate.e. Polívka 1900–1903) and provide us with solid information about the gradual enrichment of flora by alien species. there are 141 taxa at subspecific and 12 at varietal levels. Fortunately. In addition. and on their quality and completeness. present for a longer time. Čelakovský 1867–1894. This classification level most reasonably reflects the vegetation diversity of Central-European landscape (Ellenberg 1988). 5–14. and (iii) human-made habitats (Chytrý et al. 2001). estimates were made of the number of localities using the scale of Clement & Foster (1994): 1–4. it could have been. Other two spheres concern (iii) ocurrence and behaviour in primary area. A special category termed “extinct” relates to the situation when no records have been known for a long period. For each species. (ii) invasiveness. This category crucially depends on earliest floras available. (ii) seminatural (cultural landscape excluding arable land. In fact. i. 2001). The first record of the species in the territory was. scattered. Presl & Presl 1819. and common at the whole territory. These two topics were treated in detail in the previous section and represent the original information presented in this paper. types of habitat in which it is recorded were distinguished: (i) natural (forested lansdscape and naturally treeles habitats). and in many cases undoubtedly was. locally abundant. Opiz 1823. only determined for neophytes. 2002 Type of abundance in the landscape was estimated for each species on the list using the following criteria: single locality.

The corresponding figures for native representatives of these genera in British flora are approximately 400. 250 and 115. 2002) is 27548. seems to be between 33 and 35%. Kubát et al.g.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 109 hand. too (Briggs & Walters 1997). For this reason. 8 The counts are based on the final stage of manuscript kindly provided by the editors. pers. and the figure depends on whether microspecies and hybrids are included in calculations. This minor difference reflects the fact that hybridization rate is lower in aliens than in native species. we consider it justified to include microspecies in the calculation. number of species reported in these critical groups strongly reflects the level of taxonomical knowledge in the country and/or simply the presence or absence of a specialist in a given group. Marhold et al.). accounts of the British flora usually omit them. depending on how the species numbers are derived. in the case of the relatively species-poor British flora. and resulting lower chance to meet. concentrated namely in genera Rubus. and there are around 400 of them in British Isles. As discussed by Williamson (2002). the total number of native species is about twice as high. com. (2002) list 498 crosses of native species so the number of native taxa excluding hybrids is 2256. (2002) list 114 species of Hieracium. is 1194. i. their often limited distribution and smaller population sizes. contribution of aliens to the total number of taxa increases to 34. and crosses of alien species might be therefore also under-recorded compared to those of native flora. we are left with a total exceeding 300 species. The corresponding figure for the alien flora.6%. The contributon of microspecies to the total richness of Czech flora seems to be therefore lower than in British Isles – this is further pronounced by the fact that Czech native flora is richer in “macrospecies” than that of British Isles. given the diversity of geographical origins among aliens. Ruderalia. Hieracium or Taraxacum. If the hybrids are not taken into account. total number of microspecies in the flora of the Czech Republic will be therefore somewhat higher. of which there are another 105 species (J. They may therefore slightly differ from data contained in the printed version.4% to the total number of taxa reported for the Czech Republic. Stace (1997) estimates that there are around 900 native micro-species in British Isles. Moreover. possibly due to shorter common occurence of potential parental species in the territory. other barriers to hybridization may play role. Kirschner. can be rather tricky and depend on several factors. The native flora is also better known because of tradition of floristic research and historical focus. Williamson (2002) argues that while hybrids are perfectly satisfactory taxa. Including hybrids and/or microspecies in the total of native species makes a huge difference to comparison with other regions. as there are “ordinary“ species in those genera as well. unfortunately not only numbers of aliens are uncertain but those of native species too. to name the three most critical genera mentioned by Williamson (2002). 112 native species of Rubus and 72 species of Taraxacum9. Kubát et al. The number of native taxa at species and subspecies level listed in the most recent account of the Czech flora (Kubát et al. Microspecies were included in this count. 1999). . 9 This count does not include sect. giving the total of 765. excluding hybrids. Even if we bear in mind that not all of them are critical.Pyšek et al. this brings about even more bias to comparison between countries (Daehler & Carino 2001). Accepting the totals of 1378 aliens and 2754 native species means that aliens contribute 33. respectively.e. there are good specialists for most critical groups in the Czech Republic and there has been sound research on apomictic species (e. A sound answer to the question how large a proportion of Czech flora is formed by aliens.

e. 76. that of casuals. 2002 Of the total number of 1378 taxa in the Czech alien flora. These figures make it possible to calculate ratios of how large a proportion of introduced plants is able to naturalize or invade (Fig.3% archaeophytes. Brassicaceae. – Composition of the Czech alien flora. Cyperaceae. 24. Some differences between archaeophytes and neophytes are obvious: Chenopodiaceae.6%). 5). while 817 are casuals. G = 379. 2002. Of introduced taxa. The group of 397 naturalized taxa of the Czech alien flora consists of 59. similarly. Casual Archaeophytes Neophytes Aliens total 74 817 891 Naturalized 237 160 397 Invasive 21 69 90 Total 332 1046 1378 . Four neophytes and 188 archaeophytes were classified as post-invasive (Appendix 1). Of 891 casual taxa.7% of the total number of 90 invasive taxa are neophytes and 23. whereas Rosaceae. Distribution of archaeophytes and neophytes with respect to invasive status are significantly different (G-test on contingency tables. The reverse ratio of casual and naturalized taxa in both residence-time groups (Fig. Solanaceae. with other parts of Europe (39. the information on the initial stage.3% archaeophytes. and Brassicaceae most represented (Table 3). 3).6% as invasive (Fig. Number of taxa in particular categories of immigration time and invasive status (see text for definitions).1%) contributing most taxa (Fig. 25 species) representatives. and 231 of them are considered extinct. Some large families contain almost exclusively native (e. Amaranthaceae.8% were classified as naturalized. Finaly. It only makes sense to express this for neophytes because for archaeophytes. and 6. 6. Gramineae. df = 2.7% are casuals. Asia (27. whereas Fabaceae.9% are neophytes (Table 2). whereas neophytes have their origin in all continents. As to the invasive status. and Orchidaceae are those with remarkable contribution of native taxa (Fig. Apiaceae. Salicaceae. 28. and North America (15. Gramineae. 2) reflects the fact that archaeophytes which would not have become naturalized could hardly be recorded in our times. 21. There are 39 families and 162 gen- Table 2. The taxonomic structure of the alien flora involves families whose representatives commonly invade in temperate climates (Pyšek 1998b). 91. Chenopodiaceae. Hybrids are included (for their numbers see Table 4). and Solanaceae are over-represented among the aliens.6% of introduced neophytes are invasive. is missing. Polygonaceae. 64. The vast majority of archaeophytes came from the Mediterranean area.3% of neophytes (Table 2).9% are considered naturalized.7% are neophytes and 8. 97 native species – Kubát et al.1% arrived before 1500. Compared to the native flora. Scrophulariaceae and Caryophyllaceae tend to be better represented among the former. while 75. P < 0. with Compositae.001).8%). Orchidaceae. and only one alien – Cypripedium reginae) or exclusively alien (e. 2).04. the 74 casuals in this group represent long cultivated species escaping occasionally from cultivation.g.g. 4). Onagraceae and Amaranthaceae are typical “neophytic families”. a figure which corresponds well to theoretical rules and predictions in invasion biology (Williamson 1996).7% of archaeophytes and 40.110 Composition and structure of Czech alien flora Preslia 74: 97–186. i.

2.3%) are extinct 817 casual = 78.5% trees. The total number of families with native species is 138.1%) are more frequent among neophytes than among archaeophytes ( Fig.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 111 casual naturalized invasive 90 80 70 60 % 50 40 30 20 10 0 Archaeophytes Neophytes Aliens total Fig. The genera with the highest number of alien taxa are: Chenopodium (27).6% of the total Fig. The distribution of Raunkiaer’s life forms (see e. – Invasive status in groups of alien flora classified according to the immigration time.1% 1046 neophytes in total = 100% 229 naturalized = 21. Annuals contribute to the total number of archaeophytes with 57. and Vicia (18). Ellenberg 1988) in aliens is different from that in the native flora. In total. era containing archaeophytes and 98 families and 477 genera (including one nothogenus) with neophytes in the Czech alien flora.9% 69 invasive = 30. with all groups except for therophytes and phanerophytes over-represented in the latter (Fig. Oenothera (23). 34.0% annuals.Pyšek et al.7% shrubs and 4.3% biennials.4% perennials. 9. . the Czech alien flora comprises 44.8%.4%). significantly more than to that of neophytes (39. 7). 3. – Transition rates between particular categories of invasive status in Czech aliens (see text for explanation). 231 of casuals (28. Perennials (38. Bromus (21).2%) and woody plants (14. Amaranthus (24).g. 7.1% of naturalized = 6. 6).

3 3. Only those with percentage contribution to the total number of alien taxa (n = 1378) exceeding 1% are displayed.0 1.0 7.0 Africa 8.3 N America C America S America Australia 10.4 6. 2002 archaeophytes 50 40 % neophytes 30 20 10 0 Europe 43.6 11. P < 0.1 0.9 0. 4.9 2.0 3.6 5.5 5.8 5.1 1.0 5.3 Aliens 13.9 3.6 2.1 1. Archaeophytes and neophytes differed significantly with respect to the representation of plant families (G-test on contingency tables.1 0.5 1.7 1.1 4.9 6.17.7 4.9 Fig. G = 133.7 4.1 1. it is considered as a representative of each of them.9 10.8 2.8 1. – The most represented families in the Czech alien flora.6 4.9 4. If a species distribution area covers more than one continent.8 2.9 4.1 Asia 30.5 0.7 3. only families with at least 5 species were considered in calculation).2 2.001.2 2.1 .3 2. Number of species Archaeophytes Compositae Gramineae Brassicaceae Fabaceae Rosaceae Lamiaceae Chenopodiaceae Apiaceae Scrophulariaceae Onagraceae Caryophyllaceae Solanaceae Polygonaceae Boraginaceae Amaranthaceae Ranunculaceae Malvaceae Violaceae Geraniaceae Liliaceae 52 38 29 13 16 18 22 17 15 0 17 3 2 11 2 5 6 7 5 1 Neophytes 135 113 72 76 62 46 33 24 24 38 20 33 27 14 23 18 14 10 11 14 Aliens 187 151 101 89 78 64 55 41 39 38 37 36 29 25 25 23 20 17 16 15 Archaeophytes 15.5 1.7 11.3 % Neophytes 12.6 3. Table 3.5 0.7 2.4 8.2 1. – Structure of the Czech alien flora with respect to origin.2 1.6 1.3 2.6 1.3 5.0 2.4 3.8 1.112 60 Preslia 74: 97–186.3 1.3 0.9 7. df = 35.6 1.7 1.3 6. Percentage contribution of areas of origin to the total number of aliens follows the name of the continent.2 1.8 2.

The present data set shows that the C-strategy is a convenient one for naturalization but those species which possess combination of all three kinds of strategies have a better chance of becoming invasive (Table 4). the remaining 7. 49. As shown previously on a limited data set (Pyšek et al. – Comparison of taxonomic structure of alien and native floras.Pyšek et al.7% deliberately. P < 0. Since most archaeophytes reached the country as agricultural weeds. and 42. The sometimes raised caution that the use of Grime’s strategies brings about the danger of circular reasoning is not justified here since the invasive ability is a mixture of both capability to survive in disturbed habitats (typical of R-strategy) and to compete successfully (favoured by C-strategy).4% of taxa and deliberate introductions for 46. The question of which kind of life strategy favours invasion success is therefore a legitimate one.41. If the last group is not considered separately but the species belonging to it are considered in both accidental and deliberate category. i.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 113 16 native (n = 2754) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 alien (n = 1379) % of the total number of taxa Scrophulariaceae Caryophyllaceae Brassicaceae Chenopodiaceae Compositae Onagraceae Cyperaceae Gramineae Salicaceae Fig. because the classification of species into particular strategies was not directly affected by the fact how good invader a species is.6%. (2002).001). different life strategies are more likely to result in naturalization and invasion. G = 865. the ratio for total aliens is Ranunculaceae Polygonaceae Orchidaceae Solanaceae Lamiaceae Fabaceae Rosaceae Apiaceae . accidental arrivals account for 53. 1995b).4% were likely introduced by both means (Table 5).9% of all aliens were introduced into the country accidentally. In contrasting environments. 5. The most represented families are arranged according to the decreasing contribution to the alien flora. not on purpose of humans. Data on native flora were taken from Kubát et al. As to the mode of introduction. Alien and native floras significantly differed with respect to the representation of plant families (G-test on contingency tables.e. df = 76. Grime’s scheme of life strategies (Grime 1979) is a convenient predictor of invasive success.

(2002). Distribution of life histories in archaeophytes was significantly different from neophytes (G-test on contingency tables. 7. include many taxa planted on purpose and escaping from cultivation. Geo = geophytes. Phanero = phanerophytes. Hemi = hemicryptophytes. other frequently encountered purposes are for food.5%). Cham = chamaephytes. Species known to occur as more than one life history were considered as representatives of each of them.001). P < 0.114 70 60 50 % Preslia 74: 97–186. df = 4. and between aliens and native (G = 587. P < 0. Neophytes.24. Species exhibiting more than one life form were considered as representatives of each of them. and bee-keeping (Table 6). biased towards accidental introductions. P < 0. on the contrary. and native flora. medical purpose. – Distribution of life histories in archaeophytes and neophytes. landscaping. .001). 2002 archaeophytes neophytes 40 30 20 10 0 Annual Biennial Perennial Shrub Tree Fig.001).5%) than accidentally (45. More than a half of taxa are cultivated as ornamentals. 6. df = 5.89. neophytes. hence the ratio is reversed: more were introduced deliberately (54.83. Data on native flora were taken from Kubát et al. – Distribution of Raunkiaer life forms (see Ellenberg 1988 for definitions) in archaeophytes. Distribution of life forms was significantly different between archaeophytes and neophytes (G = 52. Nano = nanophanerophytes. Thero = therophytes. G = 64. 70 60 50 40 % 30 20 10 0 archaeophytes neophytes native Thero Hemi Geo Cham Nano Phanero Fig. df = 5.

df = 6. Both = NSH.0 6.001).8 20.2 Invasive 47. and between aliens and native (G = 49.Pyšek et al. Type of habitat 10 Type of introduction Accidental Both ways 61 34 7 102 Deliberate 315 178 93 586 Total 862 359 151 Human-made habitats Both types of habitats Natural/seminatural habitats Total 486 147 51 684 100 Accidental 80 60 % Deliberate 40 20 0 Human Both (Semi)natural Habitat type (land-use) Fig.1 Casual 33.7 3.8 6.1 29.7 5. SH. S.7 1. 10 Human-made = H in Appendix 1.58. Natural and seminatural habitats (see text for definition) are grouped. df = 12.9 Total 38.7 7.001). Neophytes Archaeophytes C CR CS CSR R S SR 15. df = 4. – Distribution of Grime’s life strategies according to residence time.5 1. P < 0.0 2.5 Table 5.3 35.3 0. G = 48.6 6. – Structure of the Czech alien flora with respect to the presumed type of introduction into the country (deliberately or accidentally) and type of habitat.4 20.6 2. P < 0.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 115 Table 4.3 5.0 3.4 2.4 12.2 2. Species which were introduced into the country by both means (see Table 5) are included in both groups. NS .9 8. Number of taxa are shown for particular habitat/introduction categories.8 27. 8.6 6. Data shown are percentages based on 288 classified archeophytes and 611 neophytes.95.2 Naturalized 58.8 8.6 0.35.8 4. P < 0. Natural/seminatural = N.1 25.001).3 31.7 2.0 15. and with respect to invasive status in neophytes. Distribution of life strategies was significantly different between archaeophytes and neophytes (G = 94. – Type of introduction of alien species into habitat types classified according to the land-use. Species occupying particular habitat types are significantly different with respect to the type of introduction (G-test on contingency tables. See Table 5 for details on the grouping of habitats.

Length of the bar represents the proportional contribution of the alliance to the total number of alien species in a given residence-time group. Species with multiple planting purposes were considered in each of them. 9. Rare and exceptional presence of species in alliances was not considered. Planting purpose Ornamental Food Medical Fodder Landscaping Bees Oil Wood Dye Textile Agriculture (other than food) Species number 511 149 99 74 44 37 13 13 8 6 5 % 53.116 Preslia 74: 97–186. G = 962. Number of taxa of alien origin that commonly occur in a given phytosociological unit follow its name. respectively.10.3 7. – Deliberately introduced taxa of the Czech alien flora classified with respect to means of planting.6 3. the latter that of archaeophytes. df = 177.5 10.4 1. .8 0.9 1. Archaeophytes and neophytes significantly differ in their occurrence in phytosociological alliances (G-test on contingency tables.5 Sisymbrion officinalis 105-96 Aegopodion podagrariae 74-16 Arrhenatherion 56-16 Arction lappae 43-36 Dauco-Melilotion 42-41 Balloto-Sambucion 33-18 Veronico-Euphorbion 28-47 Matricario-Polygonion arenastri 20-20 Potentillion anserinae 19-12 Convolvulo-Agropyrion 16-24 Panico-Setarion 15-28 Caucalidion lappulae 11-79 Onopordion acanthii 8-34 neophytes Aphanion 8-42 Sherardion 7-47 archaeophytes % of the total number of species Fig. the former value is the number of neophytes.6 0. See Appendix 1 for classification of particular species according to their occurence in the alliances.4 0. Only the 10 alliances with the highest representation of neophytes and archaeophytes. – Occurrence of alien species in phytosociological units. are shown.7 4.3 15. 2002 Table 6.001). P < 0.

there are 31 hybrids directly introduced or resulting from hybridization among introduced species. respectively.Pyšek et al. spontaneous hybridization involving alien species may have the reverse effects and threaten the genetic integrity and persistence of native species (Vila ` et al.3% of aliens recorded in either natural or seminatural types of habitats are or used to be planted in the past whereas the corresponding figure for human-made habitas is only 40. Majority of aliens are diploids and tetraploids. Onopordion acanthii. Polypogon fugax or Alhagi pseudalhagi were also included on the basis of .g. In the Czech flora.7%) than in neophytes (11. and Sherardion are units containing high number of archaeophytes. others are rare. halacsyi were present in their localities as single. Datura ferox. In neophytes. and 26. Alien species are thus concentrated in vegetation of deforested mesic habitats with frequent disturbances such as rubish tips.0% were recorded exclusively in natural and/or seminatural habitats. If hybrids are excluded from the total number of aliens.2% occur in both types of habitat (Table 5). or fringe communities. the quantitative data are rather scarce. Whereas hybridization between native species may produce novel genotypes and increase genetic diversity at both the population and species level.4% of the total number of all alien taxa) are common or locally abundant. 2001). In Ontario. (2000). based on a single locality or no longer present (Fig. lower proportion of diploids and higher representation of tetraploids. dentatus subsp. 2000). as pointed out by Vila ` et al. alien species as a whole are present in 91 alliances (classified according to Chytrý et al. Plants which were introduced deliberately more often invade seminatural and natural habitats than taxa arriving by accidental means: 63. hybrids contribute 13. triploids and pentaploids (Table 8). Reynoutria ×bohemica can serve as an example from the territory of the Czech Republic (Bímová et al. There are species which qualified for the list on the basis of the successful establishment of a single plant on a single locality. waste land. Aphanion. Range expansion of hybrids can be rapid and hybrids can become weeds (Abbott 1992). and Arction lappae harbour species of both groups with a comparable frequency (Fig.3% to the total number of aliens. 2001).8%) are confined to human-made habitats. Only 310 species (22. Dauco-Melilotion. fruitful specimens which ended up in a herbarium. there are 270 archaeophytes and 924 neophytes in the Czech flora. 2000). there are more species with high ploidy levels compared to archaeophytes. Aegopodion. Rumex brownii and R. Some vegetation types. The extent of hybridization is difficult to compare with other regions since. Hybridization is an important event contributing to the diversity in alien floras (Vila ` et al. e. the number of hybrids reported reflects the level of detail aimed at by particular floras. Sixty six crosses of aliens with native taxa were recorded (Table 7). Native flora has. 9). However. of the phytosociological system. Arrhenatherion (including its ruderalized stands). such as Sisymbrion officinalis.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 117 Majority of aliens (62.3%) indicates the importance of chance in records of alien flora. Archaeophytes and neophytes occur in 66 and 83 alliances. and Balloto-Sambucion are alliances with more neophytes than archaeophytes present while Caucalidion lappulae.7% (Fig. What would happen if these plant got a chance to spread their seed and became a potential founder of a population? Other species. arable land. The proportion of neophytes represented by a single locality (14. For example.7%). compared to aliens. 10). and the hybridization is more frequent in archaeophytes (18. 11. British flora has been reported to include 70 hybrids between an introduced and native species and 21 hybrids between two introduced species. 8).

Note that the data were not available for all taxa hence the species totals are lower than for other presented characteristics.3 1.2 32. Aliens significantly differed from native taxa in distribution of ploidy levels (G=120. Linaria arvensis. B.7 3.8 0.4 2. NS.5 0.118 Preslia 74: 97–186. secalinus. Bupleurum rotundifolium.3% are supposed to have more than 50 localities. Comparison of the distribution of the number of localities between archaeophytes and neophytes reveals an opposite pattern which reflects historical consequences (Table 9). Bromus arvensis.5 .7 11. triloba (Holub & Procházka 2000).4 8.2 4. L.1 7. these examples show that the role of humans is crucial in every step of the process and sometimes difficult to predict (Kowarik 2002). df 7. Veronica opaca. These numbers demonstrate that quantifying biological invasions is a difficult task.7 8. Number of taxa Ploidy level 2x 3x 4x 5x 6x 7x 8x > 8x Archaeophytes 183 67 2 23 1 8 1 Neophytes 427 9 164 1 56 1 26 24 Native 896 105 644 49 174 4 82 51 Archaeophytes 64. M. V. Marrubium peregrinum. Archaeophytes and neophytes are not significantly different with respect to representation of ploidy levels (G-test on contingency tables. vulgare. Sagina apetala. – Overview of ploidy levels in Czech alien flora.3 28 7 21 28 a find of a single plant.71. Papaver lecoqii. Stellaria pallida. classified according to the immigration time or native status of their parents and hypothesized to occur at the territory studied are shown.15. spuria. df = 3. agrestis. P<0. majus. elatine subsp. 2002 Table 7.9 0. ploidy levels with at least 5 taxa were considered).7 13.3 23. Data on chromosome numbers of native flora were taken from Kubát et al. temulentum.2 0. P. Some rare archaeophytes are on the Red List of Czech flora: Ajuga chamaepitys. (2002) where available (n = 2005).1 3.4 % Neophytes 60.2 23.1 2. Most archaeophytes are rather frequent.1 2. Kickxia spuria subsp. Galium tricornutum. Lolium remotum. Numbers of hybrid taxa.7 0.7 5. Hybrid arrivals are crosses and hybridogenous species which originated outside the territory of the Czech Republic. Polycnemum arvense. Arnoseris minima. Table 8. and hunting for the number of casuals is probably the hardest part of it! Also. – Overview of hybridization in the Czech alien flora. V.4 Native 44. commutatus. elatine. K.001). G = 0.1 0. Number of hybrid taxa with archaeophytes Archaeophytes Neophytes Aliens total 12 6 neophytes native 31 35 Species originated in cultivation 12 32 44 Hybrid arrivals Total number of hybrids 62 122 184 % of total number of taxa 18. B. 72.

1995b). G = 477. – Distribution of alien flora according to their abundance expressed as the number of localities (see text for details). Number of localities 1–4 5–14 15–49 50–499 > 499 Number of taxa Archaeophytes 22 36 34 68 172 Neophytes 571 208 124 72 71 Aliens total 593 244 158 140 243 Archaeophytes 6. Archaeophytes and neophytes differed significantly with respect to their distribution of abundance (G-test on contingency tables. Abundance scale corresponds to that used in Clement & Foster (1994) and Ryves et al. Categories including “extinct” species are disconnected. To our knowledge.8 % Neophytes 54. Table 9.1 17.8 Aliens total 43. its detailed structure is presented as a suggestion for the work of similar kind (Appendix 2).6 10. 1996. – Distribution of the types of abundance in alien flora (see text for explanation).5 51. ecological and geographical detail. the database presented here is one of the first of that kind in terms of taxonomical.2 17. For that reason. 10. in addition to the historical value (they can be used for future comparisons). extinct extinct 6% 3% 49% Fig. several other functions. (ii) Prediction possibilities. A European-scale project of a continental database of alien species could make use of sharing the information on species characteristics.Pyšek et al.6 Potential use of databases of alien species: what are they good for? Databases of alien species have. consolidating the measures of naturalization and invasiveness and providing information on potentially arriving species into the country prior to their naturalization.001).2 20.9 11. P < 0. (1996).5 10.78. .8 10. (i) The scientific importance lies in the possibility to generate hypotheses about the effect of species characters on probability of naturalization and invasive success (Crawley et al.8 6.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 5% 14% 9% 119 common 14% locally abundant scattered rare single locality single.6 19.9 6. Such better sharing of information might contribute to adopting appropriate measures in advance rather than after the invasion has started. definitely more so than those based on mere intution and autecological knowledge. (iii) Regional databases represent stones for a mosaic of databases covering larger geographical areas. Pyšek (2001) has shown that prediction systems screening species on the basis of the number of their characteristics (Daehler & Carino 2000) can be very powerful. df = 4. Pyšek et al.7 11.

ve kterých se druh vyskytuje (na úrovni svazů curyšsko-montpellierského systému) a kontinent. Kubát. V Apendixu 1 jsou dále označeny druhy. je závislý na opakovaném. Bureš. které jsou nepůvodní na celém území ČR. zda se jedná o archeofyt či neofyt (tedy druh zavlečený před objevením Ameriky nebo až poté). Comments of V. Petřík. P. Štěpánek. Trávníček. Naopak 231 náhodně se vyskytnuvších neofytů z flóry vymizelo. z toho je 184 kříženců nebo hybridogenních taxonů. Weber. činí tento podíl 34. B. (2000) a je vyjádřeno následovně: náhodný výskyt (odpovídá anglickému termínu „casual“) – druh se ve volné přírodě pravidelně nereprodukuje a pokud se v krajině vyskytuje v delším časovém horizontu. Podíl zavlečených taxonů na flóře ČR činí 33. J. 2002 Very special thanks are due to K. které jsou udávány z našeho území jako nové jsou za Apendixem 1 připojeny komentáře. Havlíček. Logistic support from I. K. invaze – druh se v krajině šíří a vytváří více či méně rozsáhlé populace. P. Gilia capitata. Bauer. 1). Z čeledí jsou nejzastoupenější Compositae. ze kterého pochází. J. M. antropogenní). jsou klasifikovány podle několika kritérií. Král. V. bez ohledu na to. Helianthus strumosus. Kaplan. W. Většina archeofytů pochází ze Středozemí. Procházka. Štěpánková. Rodgersia aesculifolia. než termíny standardního členění). Řehořek. Jedlička. společenstva. J. Centaurea nigra × phrygia.. Apiaceae. and I. Allium atropurpureum. V. F. Kirschner. původní výskyt.120 Acknowledgments Preslia 74: 97–186. Kovář. adventivních) druhů české flóry. invaze u nich proběhla v minulosti a v současné době se již nešíří (vzhledem ke své náplni je tento termín zatížen větší názorovou subjektivitou. Postavení druhu v invazním procesu odpovídá třídění navrženému v práci Richardsona et al. J. Hadinec. Lepší. Flora obsahuje 332 archeofytů a 1046 neofytů. Cerastium ×maureri. člověkem zprostředkovaném přísunu dispor. Polypogon fugax. není považován za zavlečený. P. Sedum pallidum var. Pyšek. Richardson on various aspects of the manuscripts are greatly appreaciated. Pergl. jsou dalšími charakteristikami uvedenými v Appendixu 1. které považujeme za „postinvazní“. M. Jarošík kindly conducted statistical analyses. Chán.6 % z celkového počtu introdukcí). Jsou také označeny druhy. Bohumil Slavík. Jsou zahrnuty pouze druhy. The project was made possible by a grant no. bithynicum a Sedum stoloniferum. V. Je uveden také rok prvního známého výskytu z území ČR. 5–14. Pejchal for providing many unpublished data and sharing their knowledge. pokud má druh v určité části země. O. J. Other colleagues who contributed with information on particular species are listed in alphabetical order: J. V. S. M. K. Hordeum leporinum. Z. zda k tomu došlo úmyslně či náhodně. zatímco Fabaceae. Souhrn Práce je pokusem podat kompletní přehled nepůvodních (člověkem zavlečených. Pokud z hodnocení vyjmeme křížence adventivních i původních druhů. Pro dalších 44 taxonů jsou uvedeny první údaje o zplanění. P. Gramineae a Brassicaceae (tab. Způsob zavlečení (úmyslné nebo náhodné). 892 taxonů je považováno za náhodně se vyskytující. J. Kubát and D. Křísa. P. Francírková. Solanaceae. Ostrý. Vicherek. Dančák. Objevují se v tomto ohledu i určité rozdíly mezi archeofyty a neofyty: Chenopodiaceae. Centaurea ×gerstlaueri. Papaver atlanticum subsp. 1500. pseudothominii. naturalizace – druh se ve volné přírodě rozmnožuje. které se vyskytují či v minulosti vyskytovaly ve volné přírodě. Carduus tenuiflorus. mesatlanticum. Špryňar. pokud se na lokalitách udržují po mnoho let a nezřídka se výrazně rozrůstají. Oenothera coronifera. Sutorý. typ stanoviště (původní. Scrophulariaceae a Caryophyllaceae mají více archeofytů. Adventivní flóra ČR obsahuje celkem 1378 taxonů patřících do 542 rodů a 99 čeledí. P. J. 50–499. K 19 druhům. Hrouda. L. by byl jinak pěstován a zplaňoval. Burda. Pokorný. 15–49. F. Zázvorka. E. jež nezplaňují. 206/99/1239 from the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic. Z celkového počtu 1046 neofytů došlo k naturalizaci u 229 druhů (21.8 %) a Asie (27. Přehled zavlečených druhů je uveden v Apendixu 1. 6. Grulich.6 %) a v Severní Americe (15. nezahrnuje tedy druhy pěstované. Holub & Jirásek 1967) v tom smyslu. J. Chrtek sen. Gruberová. M. Další použitá kritéria jsou. H. L. and partly supported by a grant no. přesto jsou i tyto druhy zařazeny. Bromus hordeaceus subsp. K. †A. Alhagi pseudalhagi.9%) a z nich je 69 invazních (tj.. . generativně či vegetativně. Mihulka. že za neofyty považujeme všechny druhy zavlečené po roce ca. P. Brock kindly improved our English. AV0Z6005908 from the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. Kirschnerová. Martínek. Šída. Hieracium pannosum. Řehořek. 397 za naturalizované a 90 za invazní (tab. Krahulec.1 %). and E. Chrtek jun. u nichž má výskyt výrazný charakter pozůstatku z dřívějšího pěstování na dotyčné lokalitě. jeho výskyt není závislý na dalších introdukcích a jeho přítomnost na určité lokalitě či v určitém území je dosti trvalý. polopřirozená. L. případně na ekologicky specializovaném stanovišti. náplň pojmu „neofyt“ je v zájmu jasnější terminologie poněkud posunuta proti dřívějšímu chápání (např.6 %. neofyty mají svůj původ převážně v ostatních částech Evropy (39. Abundance druhu na území ČR byla hodnocena pomocí pětičlenné semikvantitativní stupnice založené na odhadu počtu lokalit (Clement & Foster 1994): 1–4. H. Koukolíková is highly appreciated. V. K. Jehlík. 3). J. Wagner. 500 a více lokalit.4 %. Polygonaceae. T. M. Jedná se o Agrostis scabra. Härtel. David M. Prach. Parietaria pennsylvanica. Štech. J. Richardson and John H. B. Danihelka. J. Opravil. and M.

The bibliography. spuria subsp. U neofytů hodnocených samostatně je tento poměr posunut ve prospěch záměrných introdukcí (54.0 % jednoletých. 82: 959–979. 11 . Slavík 1995–2000). & Leitch I.8 % všech archeofytů. Bímová K. Evolut. 7. J. biogeography and autecology of particular alien species in the Czech Republic. V. M. 49. secalinus. – Hunt Institute. zda je druh původní či archeofyt. considers majority of important literature on taxonomy. majus. naturalizovaný či invazní. 8: 11–13. zejména při rozhodování. [534 pp. 3. Stellaria pallida. & Baskin J. na zavlečení zbývajících 7. Arrhenatherion a Balloto-Sambucion jsou svazy typické výskytem neofytů. & Conolly A. 7). M. Statut každého druhu byl důkladně přehodnocen a třebaže hojně konzultován s řadou kolegů.] Beerling D. 9. Brickell C. Leiden.9 % všech taxonů se na území ČR dostalo bez úmyslného přispění člověka. Backhuys Publishers. elatine. Blažková D. 3). & Pyšek P.1 %) jsou častěji zastoupené mezi neofyty (obr. – Dorling Kindersley. (1997): Plant variation and evolution. Ecology. Baskin C. C. For that reason. Camarda I.] Briggs D. commutatus. (1973): Poznámky k rozšíření Veronica filiformis Smith v Československu. Onopordion acanthii. Jednoleté druhy tvoří 57. 42. interspecific hybridization and the evolution of new plant taxa. Sagina apetala. Mezi rody s největších počtem nepůvodních taxonů patří Chenopodium (27). Linaria arvensis. San Diego etc. biogeography and evolution of dormancy and germination. (1992): Plant invasions. neofyty v 83 svazech. zatímco vytrvalé bylinné druhy (38.5 % stromů. Bennett M. Andersen U. Amaranthus (24). although not aspiring to be complete. 924 neofytů). used for compiling the database. Čs. P.2 % se vyskytuje jak na člověkem vytvořených.8 %) je vázána na antropogenní stanoviště. (ed. however. Ed.). náhodně se vyskytující či naturalizovaný. Archeofyty se objevují ve vegetaci patřící do 66 svazů curyšsko-montpellierského systému. Vyloučením hybridů dospějeme k celkovému počtu 1194 taxonů (270 archeofytů. B.7 % keřů a 4. Bromus arvensis. 34. M. Bot. 8). Aphanion a Sherardion (obr. – Cambridge Univ. Cambridge.3 % celkového počtu nepůvodních taxonů. Arnoseris minima. (2001): Experimental control of Reynoutria congeners: a comparative study of a hybrid and its parents – In: Brundu G. tak na přirozených či polopřirozených stanovištích a 11. References: selective bibliography of the Czech alien flora11 Abbott R. – URL [http: //www.. Bylo zaznamenáno 66 kříženců nepůvodních druhů se zástupci domácí flóry. & Calov B. archeofyt či neofyt. p.. vulgare. Dvacet dva archeofytů je na Červeném seznamu české flóry (Holub & Procházka 2000): Ajuga chamaepitys.rbgkew. (2001): World geographical scheme for recording plant distributions.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 121 Onagraceae a Amaranthaceae představují typické “neofytní” čeledi. Lolium remotum.). – Zpr. 5).0 % (151 druhů) bylo zaznamenáno pouze na (polo) přirozených typech stanoviš (tab. Katalog je nutno chápat jako první práci svého druhu pro území ČR. Veronica opaca. Mandák B. Plant invasions: Species ecology and ecosystem management.] Brummitt R. [666 pp. Společ. Press. Kříženci a hybridogenní taxony tvoří 13.7 %). v konečném důsledku odráží především náš názor na historické postavení dotyčného druhu v naší krajině. & Walters S. All the sources were. Většina druhů (62. L. – J. – Hydrobiologia 340: 277–284. the list of references includes also sources not explicitely referred to in the text. Hollis S. B. Bailey J. 283–290. Sisymbrion officinalis. Při sestavování katalogu jsme vycházeli ze základních flórových děl vztahujících se k území ČR i z primární literatury.4 % se podílely oba způsoby. Child L. J. Oenothera (23). Ecol. Bupleurum rotundifolium. Kickxia spuria subsp..2 %) a dřeviny (14. Bromus (21) a Vicia (18). London. (eds.. Ed.Pyšek et al.4 % vytrvalých bylin.) (1989): The Royal Horticultural Society gardeners’s encyclopaedia of plants and flowers. Pando F. D.. 2. & Wade. – Academic Press. M. – Trends Ecol. P. 26. (1999): Seeds. K. Galium tricornutum. [608 pp.5 %). Aegopodion. (1996): Long-term effects of sheep grazing on giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum).7 %) jsou přitom častější než kříženci neofytů (11. Papaver lecoqii. archeofyty jsou soustředěny především ve vegetaci svazů Caucalidion lappulae. Obtížnost klasifikace se projevuje při hodnocení mnoha hraničních kategorií.uk/cval]. J.org. údaje v ní obsažené budou postupně upřesňovány a autoři budou vděčni za jakékoli připomínky a doplňky. et Zucc. Polycnemum arvense. Dauco-Melilotion a Arction lappae hostí stejně často druhy obou skupin. temulentum.3 % dvouletých.7 % bylo zavlečeno úmyslně.. kříženci archeofytů (18. Celkem česká adventivní flora sestává z 44. Polygonum cuspidatum Seib. A. (2001): Plant DNA C-values database. other sources can be found in the Flora of the Czech Republic (Hejný & Slavík 1988–1992. 7: 401–405. agrestis a V. spuria. Marrubium peregrinum. triloba. K. P. Brock J. V. Rostliny introdukované záměrně se objevují častěji v přirozené vegetaci než druhy zavlečené neúmyslně (obr... Pittsburgh. (1994): Fallopia japonica (Houtt) Ronse Decraene (Reynoutria japonica Houtt. & Brummitt N.

36: 73–76. (1998): Lepidium heterophyllum i na Šumavě. (1999): Nad knihou – Eric Hobsbawm: Věk extrémů. Řivnáč. Bot. Čs. Bot. (1970): Euphorbia taurinensis All. Praha. Corydalis lutea (L. A provisional catalogue of vascular plants (excluding grasses). Cejp K. Bot.. [241 pp. – Zpr. Prag. 25: 29–41. Ges. (1886): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1884. Čes. 389–691 (1874). & Kočí M. Vol. p. – Novit. (1994): Klíč k určení českých a slovenských druhů rodu Stachys a poznámky k druhu Stachys recta. Chrtek J. Společ. p. – Botanical Society of the British Isles.. Eleutheropetale Dicotylen. Clement E. 13: 63. – Zpr. & Foster M. cl. Elsholzia cristata Willd. Königl. Gymnospermen und Monocotylen.. Cejp K. taraxacoides – a new alien plant in the Czech Republic. Čs. – Zborn. Chrtek J. – In: Arch. Ges. Bot. Čelakovský L. Bot. Chrtek J. cl. Čs. – Commisions-Verlag von Fr. Společ. – Vesmír 78: 96. Čelakovský L. – S. J. & Fuller J. Gefässkryptogamen. Bot. & Skočdopolová B. – Čs. B. Königl. zplanělá v Brně. Wiss. (1884): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1882. 1883: 34–83. Listy 1:91–92. – Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny.. (1868–1883): Prodromus květeny české. I–IV. – Čas.. (2001a): Oenothera flava subsp. 113–388 (1871–1872). – Zpr. Kučera T. C. B 351: 1251–1259. 1884: 54–90. Listy 1: 73–74. Soc. Společ. 1965: 21–25. Blažková D. 4 (1995). (1867–1881): Prodromus der Flora von Böhmen.] Crawley M.122 Preslia 74: 97–186. (1986): Poznámky k rozšíření druhu Scandix pecten-veneris L. Cejp K. London. Bot.-B. Bot. – Chapman & Hall. – S. Chrtek J. (1977): Lathyrus aphaca v Československu. Čs.-B. R. Chrtek J. 6 (2000).-B. Společ. 5: 84–86. jun. IV. (2001b): Některé zajímavé rostliny v lomech Českého krasu. 16: 11–13. & Hejný S. Cejp K. Muz. Čes. Press. 27 (1992): 1–12. – Preslia 73: 273–276. (1978): Saponaria ocymoides L. 3a. Mimulus moschatus Dougl. Nár. (1983): Poznámky k některým adventivním druhům z čeledi Cucurbitaceae v Československu. Chrtek J. L. Vedy 14: 61–66. Cronk Q. – Zpr. (1965): Bemerkungen zu einigen Grasarten I. Apetale und Sympetale Dicotylen. 1–112 (1867). Chrtek J. Praha. H. se šíří v našich městech. Čs. Wiss. Prag. sect. Die Nachträge bis 1880 nebst Schlusswort. (1990): Geum aleppicum Jacq. Chán V. cl. & Purvis A. (1986): Poznámky k československým druhům rodu Cuscuta s. Chytrý M. Listy 1: 74–75. Bot. 25: 70. Čáp J. – Čs. Čelakovský L. – Čs. Prag. J. na Rokycansku. & Křísa B. Böhm. Cejp K. Společ. (1995–2000): The European garden flora. Bot. 21: 189–193.. – Zpr. Bot. Böhm. Společ.. Harvey P. – Preslia 49: 337–346. Čelakovský L. 2002 Bufková I. (1996): Scrophularia chrysantha v Čechách. Výzk. Bot. (1882): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1881. – Čs. Prag. & Skočdopolová B. Listy 1: 30–31. Ges. Křísa B. Čes. Chrtková A. (1948b): Elsholzie hřebenitá. Společ. v pražské ulici. – Zpr. (1949): Ještě k výskytu elsholzie hřebenité v Čechách. 5 (1997). (1982): Thymus drucei – pěstovaná a vzácně zplaňující mateřídouška v ČSSR. Čes. Čs. Společ. & Skočdopolová B. Lond.-B. Listy 1: 31–32. – Zpr. Čelakovský L. Chrtek J. (1996): Comparative ecology of the native and alien floras of the British Isles. Böhm. Ges. (1948): Hibiscus trionum L. Muz. 155 (1986): 71. Chrtková A. (1948a): Dymnivka žlutá. Čech. 1–4: 1–944. (1995): Poznámky k rodu Plantago. fasc. Bot. 2. Bot. Přírod. – S. Praha. Čs. III. nový adventivní druh pro Československo. – nový adventivní druh v ČSSR. Chrtek J.] Cílek V. 18: 15–25. (1995): Plant invaders: The threat to natural ecosystems. & Žáková M. p. London. Bot. C. & Bělohlávková R. – Zpr. 2.. – Cambridge Univ. Čes. Wiss. (1885): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1883. Společ. 2. jun. Cambridge. – Phil. Verzeichnissen und Register. Společ. Čelakovský L. et al. & Slavíková Z. Bot. [304 pp. 1885: 3–48. Čs. . & Pešek J. 693–955 (1881). v Československu. Königl. 1881: 360–395.. – Zpr. 31: 79–81. III.] Cullen J. cl. Společ. – S. (1994): Alien plants of the British Isles. (eds. 17: 37–38. Společ. Čáp J. – Zpr. [590 pp.–Prír. enthaltend der wilwachsenden und allgemein kultivierten Gefässpflanzen der Königreiches… I. 29 (1994): 67–70. Böhm. (1990): Rozšíření druhu Sclerochloa dura v Čechách a na Moravě. (1948): Nový výskyt kejklířky pižmové. Königl. Trans. Wiss. Bot. Nár. (1989): Geranium versicolor. (1981): Schkuhria pinnata v Československu. – Zpr.) DC. Bot. II. Bot. & Skočdopolová B. Chrtek J. 2. – Čs.l. na Pelhřimovsku. – Zpr. na Táborsku. – Zpr.) (2001): Katalog biotopů České republiky. Chrtek J. Chrtek J. 32 (1997): 152–154. Společ.

1889: 428–502. Böhm. cl. Kluwer Acad.-B. cl. (1938): Kuklík tuhý (Geum aleppicum Jacq. na území CHKO Křivoklátsko. (1917): Eine Dekade neuer Adventivpflanzen aus Böhmen. Číhalík Č. (1891): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1890. 1893/10: 1–38. 18: 117. (eds. Bot. Malina J. Wiss. v Československu. – Österr. 1: 5–20. Bot. not if we want to be of any help. mat. – S. & Thompson K. – Preslia 74 (in press). Společ.-nat. – Zpr. & McKinney M. Soc. (1967): Zur Bestäubung. Zeitschr. 2 (1958). Roztoky. 2. (1968): Rod Hesperis v Československu. Čs. Dostálek J. (1998): The taxonomic distribution of invasive angiosperm plants: ecological insights and comparison to agricultural weeds. Dančák M. Böhm. 29 (1994): 41–46.-B. (2000): Neofyty Ambrosia psylostachya a Celastrus orbiculatus v městě Čelákovicích. – Biol. Daehler C. 33/21: 1–18. Společ. – Magy. – S. p. 14/3: 1–54 Dvořák F. Prag. (1890): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1889.-B. (1995): Společenstva s Bunias orientalis L. Dvořák F. C. Ges.. & Kühn F. 27 (1992): 47–49.p. Čelakovský L. Amer. Daehler C. 1887: 619–673. – Academia. Ecol. Biotic homogenization. [1183. (1991): Nové nálezy Adonis flammea v Československu. Ges. 2. Bot. Böhm. (1923): Nový druh kuklíku pro českou květenu. Domin K. Bot. (1937b): Geranium macrorrhizum jako novinka československé květeny. (1948): O náprstníku červeném (Digitalis purpurea L. Wiss.) v pražském parku. Soc. Čes. Bot. Domin K. – Preslia 39: 43–58. Dvořák J.-B. Prag. & Šmiták J. 2. Domin K. 2. Domin K. Böhm. 16: 8–10. (2002): Glyceria striata – a new alien grass species in the flora of the Czech Republic. 1.] Dostál J. Böhm. [1548 pp. Prag. Königl. na jižní Moravě. Společ. 1891: 3–49. (1955): Euphorbia maculata L. Daumann E. Dvořák J. Zeitschr. 2: 93–102. – S. 10: 15–16. Čs.) v Československu. Dostálek J.) – nová a památná rostlina květeny československé. – Zpr. math. Königl. v Brně. Wiss. Společ. 84: 167–180. – S. . (1888b): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1887.. – Zpr. – Zpr. (1975): Dinebra retroflexa (Vahl) Panz.. Bot.. 2. – Věda Přír. Domin K. Duchoslav M. cl..und Verbreitungsökologie dreier Impatiens-Arten. 82: 206. Bot. (1989): Nová květena ČSSR. – Preslia 27: 286.. (1952): Zajímavý případ zplanění zeravu východního Thuja orientalis L. cl. Lap. A. Ges. 3: 237–238. Čeřovský J. Daehler C. Böhm. Amer. Smrček K. Davis M. (2001): Invasion terminology: Should ecologists define their terms differently than others? No. – Zpr. Čs. Conserv. natur. & Frank M. – Hort. Čes. (1995): Ojedinělý nález Orobanche minor v Čechách. – Zpr. – Muzeum a Současnost. – Zpr. Duchoslav M. Čs. Sanit.. (1966): Zavlečené rostliny na pozemcích přádelny vlny Mosilana n.-B.] Dostál P. Čes. 82: 206. 2. & Sádlo J. Ges.. – Přírodovědecké nakladatelství. Königl. Červinka Z. – Čs. Věd.Pyšek et al. (1948–1950): Květena ČSR. 1958): Klíč k úplné květeně ČSR. Wiss. Akad. 19: 185. 1 (1954). Domin K. – S. Bot./Plenum Publ. Společ. Bot.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 123 Čelakovský L. (1888a): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1886. A. Bot. Bot. Čelakovský L. 1887: 174–239. Um. Čs. na Moravě. (1919): Zweite Dekade neuer Adventivpflanzen aus Böhmen. – Praha. Pr. Černoch F.. Prag. (1995): Šáter slanomilný (Gypsophila scorzonerifolia Ser. Wiss. Bratislava. Wiss. Čelakovský L. Čes. Ed. (1918): Dritte Dekade neuer Adventivpflanzen aus Böhmen. Prag. cl. 81–102.] Dostál J. Ges. (1994): Cymbalarietum muralis Görs 1966 v Olomouci. Domin K. [64+2269 pp. 17: 39–42. in DC. (1981): Sisymbrium polymorphum na Moravě. C. Wiss.. Čelakovský L. Dostál J. 18: 131–140. Domin K. Dvořák F. Společ. Listy 4: 85. Ecol. SAV. (2001): Hybridization between native and alien plants and its consequences. Praha. (1954. 1888: 462–554. cl. 14: 65–68. – Biol. (1982): Poznámky k druhu Sisymbrium irio L. (1924): Mydlice bazalkovitá (Saponaria ocymoides L. Domin K. – S. 30: 53–54. – Věda Přír. Vol. – Věda Přír.). C. (1887): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1885. & Carino D. Bot. Königl. Bot. Čelakovský L. Ges. (2001): Two ways to be an invader but one is more suitable for ecology. – Bull. ser. – In: Lockwood J. 982 pp. Společ. Čelakovský L. Königl. cl. (1937a): Portulaca grandiflora Hook. A. cl. 16: 112–115. Königl. Invas.-natur.) v Československu. Prag. – Zpr. 30: 80. (1889): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens im Jahre 1888.. Čs. Königl. Prag. – Allg.-B. & Carino D. Společ. – Bull. Ges. (1894): Resultate der botanischen Durchforschung Böhmens in den Jahren 1891 und 1892. 67: 264–267. (2000): Predicting invasive plants: prospects for a general screening system based on current regional models. (1983): K autogamii některých druhů rodu Chenopodium. 2. – Biol. v Československu.. – Rozpr. C. – S. 18: 116–117.-B. 23: 36–39. – Zpr. Společ. – Preslia 38: 327–332. 1886: 28–92. – Věda Přír. Daehler C. Böhm. Praha.. 26: 65–66.

M. Brock J. & Lhotská M. š ovík trojboký. p. – Preslia 44: 274–276. Hejný S.... Hejný S.. & Procházka F. H. Bot. Martin Luther University. p. – Zpr.. Frank D. Francírková T. 32: 97–99. Don v Praze a okolí. 17: 160. – John Wiley & Sons. Child L.. Čes. (1964): Zu der Art der Ausbreitung von Bidens frondosa L. – Preslia 40: 147–162. ser.. (1997): Výskyt rostlinného společenstva s Panicum capillare podél železniční tratě mezi Brnem hl. – Preslia 44: 47–49. Hejný S. Leiden... Hejný S. Bot.). Zpr. & Slavík B. Werner W. Hejný S.. Fitter A. (1968): Valerianella mixta (L. Čes. & Klotz S. v Československu. f. 99–104. nová adventivní rostlina v ČSR. Halle-Wittenberg. Společ. Bot. – In: Hadinec J. Hendrych R. – Preslia 41: 245–247. (1950–1951): Echinochloa macrocarpa Vazing. – Preslia 36: 392–402. Společ. – Preslia 40: 301–303. (2002): Bupleurum croceum Fenzl. 31: 75–76. (1973): Karanténní plevele Československa. Gruberová H. 34: 45–47. (1999): Bohatý výskyt synantropního druhu Amaranthus deflexus v Brně.. Čes. 3 (1992). 89–98. Grüll F. Brock J. (eds. 1 (1988). Camarda I. Düll R.. (1972): Artemisia tournefortiana Reichenb. v Praze 8. 542 pp. Čes. – Zpr. (2001): Výskyt synantropního epekofytu Asclepias syriaca na železniční trati v Brně-Maloměřicích. Filippov P.. & Paulissen D. 35 (2000): 243-245. & Prach K. Additamenta ad floram Reipublicae Bohemicae. na novém stanovišti. Press.. Grüll F. I. (1994): Společenstvo s Rumex patientia v oblasti železničního uzlu v Brně. Listy 1: 56–63. Camarda I. Husák Š. (1996): Ojedinělý výskyt karanténního synantropního druhu Acroptylon [sic!] repens na železniční stanici Brno-Maloměřice. & Wade M. 4: 71–76..). (1975): Opětovný výskyt zavlečeného lilku ostnatého. Hejný S. Společ. jako adventivní rostlina v Československu. J. Chichester. & Peat H. eine neue eingeschleppte Art in der Tschechoslowakei. – Čs. (1991): Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. (1982): Pozoruhodný nález Ficus carica L. & Smejkal M. Čs. (1964): Artemisia sieversiana Willd. 50–52. – Zpr. – In: Brundu G. Bot. (1984): Zum Charakter des Vorkommens von Matteucia struthiopteris. Společ.. – Cambridge Univ. (1984): Ekobiologie neofytního česneku Allium paradoxum. Lustyk P. 18: 1–248. nový zavlečený druh v ČSSR. Společ. Čes. n. – Studie Čs. [557. – Zpr. Cambridge.. a zastávkou Horní Heršpice. Gutte P. Grime J. Hejný S. & Pyšek A. math. & Osbornová J. (1968): Zur Art Trifolium pannonicum in der Tschechoslowakei. Společ. 27 (1992): 36–40. in die Teichgebiete der Tschechoslowakei. (eds.. (1978): Původní nebo nepůvodní rostliny naší květeny? – Živa 26: 2–5. Čes. [731 pp. Kropáč Z. .).. – Zpr. Grüll F. Bot. (1972): Artemisia verlotorum Lamotte – eine für die Tschechoslowakei neue Art. Child L. – Živa 23: 211. Bot. 34: 57–61. Bot. Hejný S. (1948): Zdomácnění dvouzubce listnatého (Bidens frondosus L.. (1979): Plant strategies and vegetation processes. – In: Brundu G. Ellenberg H.-natur. Vol. 6: 111–118. Grüll F. Čs. & Priszter S. Backhuys Publ. (1999): Čechřina uzlatá (Myrrhoides nodosa) – nový druh z čeledi Apiaceae pro Českou republiku.] Ellenberg H. Hachler E. – Čs. (1949): Nová adventivní rostlina v ČSR – Rumex triangulivalvis (Danser) Rech.. – Preslia 36: 416–421. Bot. Hadinec J. (eds. & Wade M. Listy 2: 17–22.) Dufr. Jehlík V. Plant invasions: Species ecology and ecosystem management.] Hendrych R. Bendová K. – Zpr. – Zpr. E. Bot. – Academia. (1990): Biologisch-ökologische Daten zur Flora der DDR. – Preslia 38: 202–204.) (1988–1992): Květena České republiky. Grüll F. (2001): Contribution to the invasive ecology of Rudbeckia laciniata. Bot. 19/Mater. Společ. (1988): Vegetation ecology of Central Europe. 2002 Eitel F. – J. Grüll F. Ecol. (1969): Amaranthus patulus Bertoloni – eine neue Art der tschechoslowakischen Flora. Čes.. Wirth V. 1973/8: 1–156... (1966): Gypsophilla scorzonerifolia Ser. Akad. Listy 3: 104–109. Leiden. (1994): The ecological flora database. Plant invasions: Species ecology and ecosystem management. Společ. Hendrych R. (eds. (1952): Carex muskingumensis Schw. Hejný S. – Preslia 56: 107–116. Grüll F. Backhuys Publ. (2001): Seed ecology of alien Bidens frondosa in comparison with native species of the genus. Grüll F.. Společ. & Chrtek J. – Wiss Beitr.) v ČSR.. Kopecký K. Společ. 82: 415–425. – Zpr. P. (1971): Současný stav rozšíření Allium paradoxum (M. Čs. Bot. Hadač E. Bieb. Věd. – Zpr. 37 (in press). Bot.) G. & Lhotská M. Praha. – Čs. – Čs. Listy 5: 39–40.124 Preslia 74: 97–186. 2 (1990). – Scripta Geobot. 540. Grüll F. Bot. Weber H. Bot.

– Acta Univ. & Jarolímová V. Společ.. Společ. – Čs.). Hobsbawm E. Hroudová Z. Čs. Bot. 8–9: 137–141. Academia. in Europa und in der Tschechoslowakei besonders. 15: 1–15. Holub J. Bot. . Holub J. Jehlík V. species nova – with additional notes on some other Leonurus taxa. [12+627 pp. (1975): Claytonia alsinoides – nová zplanělá rostlina československé květeny a poznámky k jejímu rodovému zařazení. 14: 1–366. Holub J. (1971b): Sisymbrium wolgense M. London. 6: 179–182. – Zpr. – Preslia 56: 319–328. – Preslia 59: 135–154. Jehlík V. – Zpr. Husák Š. – nová adventivní rostlina v Československu. Holub J. Čs. – Preslia 73: 29–57. Holub J. (1978b): Sanguisorba muricata Gremli. Holub J. a new naturalized species in Czechoslovak flora. (2001): Květena – Krkonoš zvláště – před čtyřmi staletími. 21: 45–55. Hendrych R. (1971): Opletník sličný. – Folia Geobot. Listy 2: 11–12. Praha.–Biol.. 3: 57–64. compacta v České republice. ser. Holub J. Společ. Holub J. – Zpr. 1: 37–38. & Jirásek V. Bot. Hora-Hořejš P. 13: 77–85. – Folia Geobot. – Preslia 52: 209–216.Pyšek et al. Jedlička J. nový adventivní druh československé květeny. The short twentieth century 1914–1991. (ed. Floristické materiály ke květeně Kadaňska. Holub J. Čs. Jehlík V. – Preslia 47: 317–330.). & Holubičková B. – Čs. 7: 79–82. 1786 – nový antropofyt československé květeny. 26: 19–31. 2: 69–113. nová zdomácňující ovíjivá rostlina. Společ. Společ. v Čechách. (1993): Leonurus intermedius. Společ. 6: 173–176. – Preslia 65: 97–115. (1972) Rozchodník bledožlutý – Sedum ochroleucum Chaix ap.. – Muzeum a Současnost. – In: Vegetace ČSSR. (1996): Poznámky k nálezu Pentaglottis sempervirens v České republice. – Zpr. – Zpr. Bieb. (1986): Polozapomenuté a nové nálezy květeny ČSR. Holub J. Holub J. Mandák B. Hlaváček R. Čs. Jehlík V. Sci. Bot.] Holub J. (1978c): Valerianella mixta (L. – Preslia 72: 187–230. Holub J. Čs. Čs. Společ. 31: 101–115. A. (1984): Artemisia biennis v Československu. (ed. Listy 1: 7. Bot. Holub J. – Preslia 33: 315–321. (1980): Oxalis debilis. Společ. – Zpr. – Severočes. – Baronet & Via facti. (1967): Zur Vereinheitlichung der Terminologie in der Phytogeographie. nová adventivní ostřice pro ČSR. – In: Kubát K. (1966): Nový neofyt československé květeny – Epilobium adenocaulon Hausskn. (1980): Die Verbreitung von Lactuca tatarica in der Tschechoslowakei und Bemerkungen zu ihrem Vorkommen. A. (1991): Age of extremes. Přír. – Zpr. (1981): Chorology and ecology of Sisymbrium volgense in Czechoslovakia. Čs. Holub J. Severočes Přír. (1974): Lappula patula (Lehm. (1987): Einige Bemerkungen zu den Echinops-Arten in der Tschechoslowakei. (1978a): Epilobium komarovianum Léveille v Československu. ser. Bot. (1986): The vegetation of railways in Northern Bohemia (eastern part). – Abacus Publ. (1978): Über die fortschreitende Naturalisation der Art Setaria faberi Herrmann in der Tschechoslowakei. Phytotax. (1996): Několik poznámek k nálezu Reynoutria japonica var. Bot. 6: 109–110. & Procházka F. Čs. Praha. Společ. (1991): Nepeta grandiflora nalezena zdomácnělá v Praze. Společ. & Pyšek P. – Živa 57: 165–166.) Dufr. Jehlík V. (1971a): Předběžné poznámky k výskytu druhu Setaria faberi Herrmann v Československu. – Zpr. – Zpr. Slov. 31: 167–171. (1948): Centaurea diffusa Lam. (1997): Toulky českou minulostí 6. Hendrych R. Bot. Čs. 33: 1–42.. Preslia 71: 27–32.. – In: Kubát K. Hendrych R. Bot. – Preslia 46: 333–342. Bot. (1999): Bolboschoenus glaucus – nový druh pro Českou republiku. Bot. – Zpr. Carol. 8–9: 146–148. Vill. Jehlík V.. (1949): Carex muskingumensis Schwein. Bot.) Menyh. – Zpr. nový adventivní druh československé květeny. (1981): Rubus xanthocarpus from China. (2000): Red List of vascular plants of the Czech Republic – 2000. Bot. (1961): Rozšíření Veronica filiformis Smith v Československu a poznámky k jejímu výskytu. 5: 5–10. Čes. Acad.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 125 Hendrych R. Čs. ser. Společ. (1989): Physalis alkekengi. – Acta Bot. Zákravský P. – Preslia 53: 9–32. Jehlík V. Jehlík V. Slov. 16: 407–421. Phytotax. Holub J. Floristické materiály ke květeně Kadaňska. (1970): Brunnera macrophylla – nový zplanělý taxon v československé květeně. natur. & Palek L.. Houfek J. (1992): Nález druhu Elodea nuttallii.

– Zpr.. Proc. Plant Protect. (1973): Die Beziehung zwischen Siedlungsgeschichte und Verbreitung von Imperatoria ostruthium im Gebirge Orlické hory (Adlergebirge.). Praha 32/Mater. & Svobodová Z. Kornas J. (eds. – Preslia 39: 206–208. Nordostböhmen). – Labský Plavec. – In: Veverka K. & Štěpánek J. [506 pp. Slez. & Rostański K. . p. Lecjaksová S. Oxalis latifolia. (1980): Rozšíření Oenothera biennis L. – Preslia 33: 199. – Čas. (1968): Beitrag zum Erkennen des Verbreitungscharakters der Art Bunias orientalis L. Phytotax. & Rostański K. 149: 200–210. – Zpr. sci. – Folia Geobot. Čes. (1983): Hirschfeldia incana v Československu.-natur. Děčín. Biological invasions in Europe and Mediterranean Basin. Kolbek J. J. (1998): CLOPLA1 (CLOnal PLAnts. M.. – Wiss. – Zpr. Listy 4: 87–90. (1984): Erysimum argillosum. 2. Praha-Ruzyně. Halle. (1962): Druhý příspěvek k poznání květeny rudiš na Ostravsku. (1963): Die Echium-Arten der ČSSR. – Acta Mus. (2001): Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. – Preslia 55: 315–323. Muz. Bot. Výr. Společ. Kaufman S. Společ. Bot. et al. 12: 137–142. Společ.. (1967): Rumex confertus Willd. Jehlík V. (eds. 19–36. Starček nestejnozubý. – North Carolina Botanical Garden. – Zpr.) Scop. Jehlík V. Kopecký K.cas. Společ. Jílek V. 3: 109–110. 15: 217–220. Kopecký K. Phytotax. T. Čs. Dordrecht. – Academia. (1998): Galium parisiense – a new alien species for the Czech Republic. 42 (10): 6. (1990): Plant invasions in Central Europe: historical and ecological aspects. cizí složnokvětá bylina. & Meacham C. – Folia Geobot. Reginaehrad. 23: 45–50 Kirschner J. latifolia – nové karanténní plevele skleníkových kultur okrasných rostlin v Československu. Jehlík V. natur. & Debussche M. Bot. (1979): Cymbalarietum muralis Görs 1966 v Průhonickém parku. Kaplan Z. Ionoxalis in der Tschechischen Republik und in der Slowakei. XI. Evolut. 16: 199–204.. Společ. Muz. (1968): K rozšíření rozrazilu kavkazského (Veronica filiformis Sm. – Folia Geobot. Nár. Kolar C. Z. 1. Rostl. (2000): Zavlékání cizokrajných rostlin dopravními prostředky do Evropy. version 1) – a database of clonal growth in plants of Central Europe. & Klimeš L. & Kurková J. & Řehořek V. (1967): Doplňky k rozšíření Veronica filiformis Smith v Československu.] Jehlík V. & Härtel H. 2002 Jehlík V. litoralis auch in der Tschechoslowakei. Viola canadensis a Viola obliqua – nové adventivní druhy v české květeně. – Trends Ecol. se rozšiřuje v evropských přístavech.126 Preslia 74: 97–186. – Přírod. & Lodge D. Kluwer Academic Publ. Hansen A. Čs. Nitra. Jehlík V. Phytotax. natur.butbn. Jehlík V. (1952): Sisyrinchium angustifolium Mill. Čas. (1999): Synthesis of the North American Flora. Jehlík V. & Hejný S. 15 (1974): 65–70. – Zpr. Společ. Bot.. math. (1974): Main migration routes of adventitious plants in Czechoslovakia. Bot. Koš ál O. ser.). (1975): Angelica archangelica subsp. (2000): Lemna turionifera – nový druh pro květenu České republiky. Čs. (ed. – In: di Castri F. (1963): Nejdůležitější výsledky taxonomické revise československých druhů rodu Erysimum. Jehlík V. & Štěpánek J.. Bot. (1995): Notes on the genus Oenothera subsect. Kotlaba F. A. – Čs. Jehlík V. & Krkavec F.. Kaplan Z. Czechoslov. – Preslia 47: 145–157. Praha. Čes. ser. Klimešová J.. & Slavík B. – Vesmír 32: 21–22. 19: 121–127. (1988): Štavele Oxalis debilis a O. 29 (1994): 33–39. Listy 3: 133–134. (1997): Nové společenstvo s Chenopodium pumilio na území Prahy. – URL [http://www. Kartesz J. (1978): O rozšíření a původu čechřice vonné (Myrrhis odorata (L. – nová adventivní rostlina v Čechách. Jehlík V. Klotz G. Čs. & Dostálek J. (1995): Arten der Gattung Oxalis Sect. Kolbek J. Jehlík V. – Preslia 70: 51–56. v ČSR. Společ. Bot. (1961): Cardamine chelidonia L. 149–160. ser. Výzk.. Bot. – Zpr. – Preslia 35: 135–145. 9: 241–248.cz/klimes]. & Kopecký K. Kilián Z. Úst. 34 (1999): 135–141. – Preslia 40: 274–293. S. Univ.) (1998): Cizí expanzivní plevele České republiky a Slovenské republiky. & Rostański K. Oenothera (Onagraceae) in the Czech Republic. Chapel Hill. Oxalis debilis – Preslia 67: 1–14. (1903): O kleistogamických květech hluchavky objímavé (Lamium amplexicaule L. na Šumpersku. Jehlík V. (1950–1951): Iva xanthiifolia v Nymburce. 30: 435–444. & Slavík B. 2: 172–175.) v jižních Čechách. Conf. Konětopský A. in der Tschechoslowakei.0. – Čs. Jílek B. Čes. Version 1. – Zpr. v Československu a klíč k určování našich pupalek.) v Orlických horách.). 14: 23–25. (1995): Současné rozšíření Heracleum mantegazzianum na Křivoklátsku. 8: 241–248. Bot.

Bratislava. – Zpr. – Opera Corcont. Kovanda M. Pyšek P. 3: 65–98. Komiss. Čes. Krátká J. Čes. Lhotská M. Brundu G.. – Živa 47: 203–204. Přír. Prach K. jun. Kreh W. 35: 95–97.. na Moravě po 115 letech. E. – Biol. v Krkonoších. (1979): Chenopodium pumilio in Czechoslovakia: its strategy of dispersal and domestication. Lhotská M. (1994): Quartäre Vegetationsgeschichte Europas. Kl. 6/7: 90–95 Krist V. Přírod. subsp.. Společ. (1998): Povodňové náplavy: otevřený biologický prostor. ser. – Preslia 71: 241–248. Společ.] Lhotská M.) Janchen). (1976): Campanula rhomboidalis new to Bohemia. & Slavíková Z. (eds. Brock J. – Folia Geobot. 32: 79–86. Krahulec F. Bot. – Acta Univ. 1984/1:9. & Jiřiště L. (1968): Planá řepice (Brassica rapa L. – Zpr. Kowarik I. Čes. dosud přehlížený plevel. (1984): Nový nález Ammi majus v ČSR. Přírod. Campanula rhomboidalis L.. Společ. 9: 15–18. – Čas. Krist V. (1984): Bemerkungen zu einigen tschechoslowakischen Arten der Gattung Rumex s. [390 pp. Florist. Phytotax.. Hrouda L. Kurka R.) Holub. Kučera J. 12: 209–213..) (2002): Klíč ke květeně České republiky...] . Phytotax. str. Phytotax. Kovanda M. Bot. – Folia Geobot. 34 (1999): 177–178. Fischer. A. (1997): Bromopsis pumpelliana subsp. Křísa B.. (1982): La civilisation de l’Occident médiéval. Arbeitsgem.. [296 pp. Kubát K. Společ. 26: 39–42. Lang G. Praha (in press). (1991): Řeřišnice vlaštovičníková (Cardamine chelidonia) v České republice. (eds). (1981): Nový nález Lycopsis orientalis v Československu. Opava. N. (2002): The alien flora of Germany – first insights from a new German database. & Krahulec F. Čs. Přír. a new hybrid in Campanula. & Klotz S. (1975): Notes on the ecology of germination in Myrrhis odorata. Kubát K. & Dostálek J. & Zázvorka J. – Zpr. Invas. 45: 41–45. & Chrtková A. Bot. & Krahulec F. (1968): Poznámky k rozšíření druhu Smyrnium perfoliatum L. in Europa. – Preslia 33: 65–68. (1996): Znáte česnek podivný? – Zprav. H. Proc. (1968b): Zur Verbreitungsbiologie der Art Virga strigosa (Willd. flexuosa – nová rostlina květeny České republiky. Kubínová D. (1997): Rozšíření druhu Rumex longifolius DC. Paris. Kubát K.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 127 Kotlaba F. – Folia Geobot. Kaplan Z. Chrtek J. (2000): Česnek podivný (Allium paradoxum) také na Moravě. Kovář P. d. Backhuys Publ. Krahulec F. sylvestris (Lam. Čs. Kühn F. (1968a): Die Gattung Bidens in der Tschechoslowakei. (1966): Die älteste Fund der Art Bidens frondosa L. v ČSSR. & Hejný S. Okr.. – Preslia 57: 205–217.. (1978): Karpologie a diasporologie československých zástupců čeledi Fabaceae. (1999): Campanula ×iserana (C. – Folia Geobot. Kubínová D. Praha. Společ. (1957): Zur Begriffsbildung und Namensgebung in der Adventivfloristik. Brno 23: 57. 25: 47–48. (1999): Phenology of Rumex longifolius: a key factor for the success of an invasive species? – Preslia 70 (1998): 339–348. Praha-západ 17: 37–40. Purkynianae 3: 41–47. 15: 81–86. 3: 413–418. 10: 79–80. Kuehn I. – Folia Geobot. – Preslia 48: 341–345. (1940): Příspěvek k adventivní a ruderální květeně Moravy II. Bot. Společ. F. (1908): Mährens Ackerunkräuter und Ruderalpfalnzen. – Sborn. Kučera J. Čs. & Husová M. Krahulec F. – Zpr.-Soz. – Zpr. Methoden und Ergebnisse. (1960): Nové floristické nálezy v okolí Nového Města nad Metují a Týniště nad Orlicí. – Zpr. Lhotská M. Kirschner J. – Preslia 69: 359–362. Zprav. (2000): Společenstvo se Sedum hispanicum v Orlických horách. Bot. (1997): K výskytům a ekobiologii zárazy menší (Orobanche minor) na území České a Slovenské republiky. Lhotská M. & Cigánová K. Durchforschung Mährens. Čs. – G. Kropáč Z. – Brünn. 14: 367–375. (1990): Lindernia dubia – nový zavlečený druh v Československu. – Academia. Krippelová T. Bot. Bot. Ecology and management of plant invasions. Lhotská M. 34: 79–89. (1987): Ako sa rozmnožujú a rozširujú rastliny. (1993): Teucrium scorodonia (Lamiaceae) in Böhmen und Mähren. Ochr. Kl. Mus.. – Zpr. Le Goff J. (1996): Zvonek kosníkovitý. – Zpr. Kubešová S. (1999): Two new hybrids of Epilobium ciliatum (Onagraceae). Slez.. Mitteil. (2002): Human agency in biological invasions: secondary releases foster naturalisation and population expansion of alien plant species. Čs. rhomboidalis × rotundifolia). Leiden (in press). Litoměřice. – Academia. Brno 17 (1934): 69. & Williamson M. Phytotax. – Mitt. & Kopecký K. Laus H. 3: 108–109. Jena etc. 3: 65–68. – Arthaud. – Obzor. (1935): Příspěvek k adventivní a ruderální květeně Moravy I. Bot. – Thaiszia – J.Pyšek et al. (1979): Eragrostis tef (Zuccagni) Trotter u Lovosic. Společ. Krčan K. Štěpánek J. Phytotax. Chrtek J. Kubát K. – In: Child L. Společ. Lhotská M. Kovanda M. 1: 186–189. 4 (in press). Bot. – Severočes. – Východočes. – Sborn. Bot. zur naturwiss.

Čs. Additamenta ad floram Reipublicae Bohemicae. Mus. 476 pp. 35 (2000): 161–171. Pavlásek V. (1999): Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. & Procházka F.. 35–40.. II. hluchavka zvrhlá. – Zprav. Přír. [50 pp. Nár. 31/2: 5–7. & Záborský J. (2001): Nový druh jihoafrického starčku v České republice – Senecio inaequidens. (1901). – Zpr. (1904). Bot. 163–169. – Příroda 38: 88. Společ. 1: 32+303 pp.) Bernh. Novák F. Marek M. Promberger. (1969): Zur Karpobiologie.). (1963): Xanthium strumarium L. – Zpr. amplexicaule × purpureum). – C. Petřík P.. 23: 101–104. (eds) (2001): Global strategy on invasive alien species. Společ. Společ. (1809–1814): Tentamen florae bohemiae. Čs. Otruba J.) All. (eds. (2002): Cyperus eragrostis. Společ. Společ. Schwarzová T. 14: 45–57. – Věda Přír. Novák J.. – Severočes. 53–55. 206–207. Mandák B. (1823): Böheims phänerogamische und cryptogamische Gewächse. – IUCN. (1966): Další lokalita vysázeného Leontopodium alpinum Cass. – Thaiszia 7: 41–50. (1924): Stachys affinis Bge. in der Tschechoslowakei. A. (2002): Cystopteris bulbifera (L. Bot. plevelí v Čechách. A. W. Petřík P. (eds. 712 pp. M. Opiz F. (1988): Smyrnium perfoliatum L. Poboč. (1992): Agriophytes in der Vegetation Mitteleuropas. Bot. 195–200. jednoděložné (Monocotyledones). nová rostlina moravská. & Feráková V. – Severočes. & Krahulec F. Řivnáče. Vegetationskd. Pohl J. McNeely J. Lohmeyer W. Neville L. (R. Opulus Press. Karpologie und Verbreitung der Art Iva xanthiifolia Nutt. a new alien species of the Czech flora – Preslia 74 (in press). Přír. & Kutílek J. Čes. Lustyk P. Bot. Mandák B. Ložek V. 1809. Phytotax. orientale (L. Mikoláš V. – Veda. Enders. 5: 244. – Zpr. 31: 27–49. Murín A. Přír.. (1980): Z historie synantropní vegetace 1–6. – Preslia 41: 248–257. Schei P. 7: 77–80. Zpr. 99–104. 4: 415–434. et J.] Opravil E. (1997): Microrrhinum littorale (Bernh. 2: 6+234 pp. & Prach K. (1946): Lamium hybridum (L. A. [182 pp. Pilát A. – Zpr.. Invazní rostliny v české flóře. & Procházka F. & Sukopp H.) Speta. Čes. Prag. 23: 57–58. 259–265. v obci Březí v okrese Plzeň-jih. (1987): Paleobotanické doklady k rozšíření některých rostlin v československém holocénu..) J. Pešek F. 32. Prag.128 Preslia 74: 97–186. E. – Preslia 35: 327–329. (1997): The plant book. – P. Lonsdale M. & Pyšek P. Olomouc. [162 pp. Praha. Rostliny srostloplátečné (Sympetalae). Opiz P. – Cambridge Univ. Bot. IV. Braun – staronové druhy Českého středohoří. Čes. – In: Pyšek P. . 22/Mater. & Slavík B. – Státní zemědělské nakladatelství.. Společ. Bot.. 54: 7–12. – Čas. 167–168. Ed. – Čs.) Rouy et Fouc. 36: 29–36. Marhold K. Čes. – In: Hadinec J. subsp. nahosemenné (Gymnospermae) a tajnosnubné cévnaté (Cryptogamae vasculares). Hindáková M. – E. Bratislava.. I. (1953): Listnaté stromy a keře našich zahrad a parků. (1952): Rapistrum rugosum (L. Opravil E. Mackeová Z. (1902). – Special features in biosystematics and biodiversity 3. 67–72. 130–131. Uppsala. (1987): Karyotaxonomický prehlad flóry Slovenska.. 88–90. (eds. 25: 1–185. (1949): K zeměpisnému rozšíření mydlice bazalkovité u Všelis jako adventivní rostliny. (1969): Synantropní rostliny dvou středověkých objektů ze SZ Čech. 682 pp. H. E. a new species in the flora of Slovakia and Czech Republic. I. (1997): Druhy rodu Reynoutria na území České republiky. Slovník terminologický a věcný. Čes.. – Schr. Bot. Peniašteková M. Gland. V kommissí u Fr. (1900).) Gaertn. Rostliny bezkorunné (Apetalae). (1993): Výskyt druhu Nicandra physalodes (L. XLIV. – Ochr. Společ. – Spis. Západočes. Klíč. Společ.) (1999): Ecology of closely related plant species. Zpr. M. Cambridge. Müller J. Čs. III. (2001): Šrucha velkokvětá (Portulaca grandiflora) – zplanělá v Praze. – Zpr.. Schultes a Polycnemum majus A. Listy 4: 83–84. ex Willd. J. Polívka F. ze středověku Ostravy.] Marvan P. Rostliny prostoplátečné (Choripetalae). (1999): Šíření a současné rozšíření Digitalis purpurea v České republice. 620 pp. natur. – Biológia 48: 31–35. Soustavný přehled rostlinstva. 2. Feráková V. A. Opravil E. 2002 Lhotská M. 227–233.. (1993): Veronica peregrina – neoindigenofyt flóry Slovenska. (1900–1904): Názorná květena zemí Koruny české. – Folia Geobot. Společ. Schmid B. 32: 98–101. – Ecology 80: 1522–1536. Enders und Compagnie. Mater. – Preslia 38: 416–417. 131–136. Mooney H. R. 117: 188–191. 30: 91–96. Bot. 1814. Mabberley D.). v ČSSR. 37 (in press). Mus. [436 pp. 291–297. J. Seznam autorů. Váchová M. – Živa 28: 4–5.] Michal E.. – Zpr. Praha. Bot.. Pěnková I.] Mandák B. Uhríková A. (1988): Oenothera biennis jako jednoletá bylina. Májovský J. orientale Crantz) v ČSR. M. (1999): Ochranářské otázky ve světle vývoje přírody. Opravil E. Bot. & Waage J. na Moravě. Press. (1995): Peltaria alliacea (Brassicaceae) – nový druh České republiky. (1852): Seznam rostlin květeny české. (2001): Gagea bohemica (Zauschn. K. Rejstříky. Čes. sect. & Bímová K.

Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic

129

Pospíšil V. (1952): Badil (Sisyrinchium angustifolium Mill.) na Moravě. – Čs. Bot. Listy 5: 35–39. Presl J. S. & Presl C. B. (1819): Flora Čechica. – In comissis apud J. G. Calve, Pragae. [224 pp.] Procházka F. (1998): Poznámky k rozšíření některých adventivních druhů rostlin na Šumavě. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 32 (1997): 160, 181–182, 196. Procházka F. (2001): Květena Svatoboru u Sušice (Horní Pootaví). – Erica 9: 55–68 Procházka F. (2002): Oenothera flava subsp. taraxacoides (Woot. et Standl) W. L. Wagner. – In: Hadinec J., Lustyk P. & Procházka F. (eds.), Additamenta ad floram Reipublicae Bohemicae. I., Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 37 (in press). Procházka F., Faltys V. & Marek M. (1983): Nové lokality některých zplanělých a zavlečených rostlin ve východních Čechách. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 18: 109–114. Příhoda A. (2001): Pozůstatky starých vinic v Tuchoměřicích. – Zprav. Ochr. Přír. Okr. Praha-západ 22: 14–15. Pyšek A. (1974): Collomia grandiflora, nový neofyt Západočeského kraje. – Zprav. Západočes. Poboč. Čs. Bot. Společ. 1974/1:5 Pyšek A. (1995): Neofytní druh Physalis philadelphica na skládkách na Českomoravské vysočině. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 30: 123–124. Pyšek A. (1997): Lokalita Melica altissima L. v osadě Dolánky u Kaštic. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ., Praha, 32: 73–74. Pyšek A. & Vobořil Z. (2002): Vzácný druh hvězdnice (Aster divaricatus L.) v Tachově a jeho blízkém okolí. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 37 (in press). Pyšek P. (1989): Archeofyty a neofyty v ruderální flóře některých sídliš v Čechách. – Preslia 61: 209–226. Pyšek P. (1991): Heracleum mantegazzianum in the Czech Republic: the dynamics of spreading from the historical perspective. – Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 26: 439–454. Pyšek P. (1994): Ecological aspects of invasion by Heracleum mantegazzianum in the Czech Republic – In: de Waal L. C., Child L. E., Wade P. M. & Brock J. H. (eds), Ecology and management of invasive riverside plants, p. 45–54, J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Pyšek P. (1995a): Approaches to studying spontaneous settlement flora and vegetation in central Europe: a review. – In: Sukopp H., Numata M. & Huber A. (eds.), Urban ecology as the basis of urban planning, p. 23–39, SPB Academic Publ., Amsterdam. Pyšek P. (1995b): On the terminology used in plant invasion studies. – In: Pyšek P., Prach K., Rejmánek M. & Wade M. (eds.), Plant invasions: general aspects and special problems, p. 71–81, SPB Academic Publ., Amsterdam. Pyšek P. (1998a): Alien and native species in Central European urban floras: a quantitative comparison. – J. Biogeogr. 25: 155–163. Pyšek P. (1998b): Is there a taxonomic pattern to plant invasions? – Oikos 82: 282–294. Pyšek P. (2001): Past and future of predictions in plant invasions: a field test by time. – Diversity & Distributions 7: 145–151. Pyšek P., Kučera T., Puntieri J. & Mandák B. (1995a): Regeneration in Heracleum mantegazzianum – response to removal of vegetative and generative parts. – Preslia 67: 161–171. Pyšek P. & Mandák B. (1998a): Přehled lokalit Acorus calamus v České republice a poznámky k jeho zdomácnění. – Muzeum a Současnost, ser. natur., 12: 25–50. Pyšek P. & Mandák B. (1998b): Elodea canadensis: naturalizace v České republice a seznam lokalit. – Muzeum a Současnost, Roztoky, ser. natur., 12: 51–68. Pyšek P. & Prach K. (1995a): Historický přehled lokalit Impatiens glandulifera na území České republiky a poznámky k dynamice její invaze. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 29 (1994): 11–31. Pyšek P. & Prach K. (1995b): Invasion dynamics of Impatiens glandulifera – a century of spreading reconstructed. – Biol. Conserv. 74:41–48. Pyšek P. & Prach K. (2002): Research into plant invasions in the Czech Republic: history and focus. – Biol. Invas. 4 (in press). Pyšek P., Prach K. & Šmilauer P. (1995b): Relating invasion success to plant traits: an analysis of the Czech alien flora. – In: Pyšek P., Prach K., Rejmánek M. & Wade M. (eds.), Plant invasions: general aspects and special problems, p. 39–60, SPB Academic Publ., Amsterdam. Pyšek P. & Pyšek A. (1994): Současný výskyt druhu Heracleum mantegazzianum v České republice a přehled jeho lokalit. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 27 (1992): 17–30. Pyšek P. & Pyšek A. (1995): Invasion by Heracleum mantegazzianum in different habitats in the Czech Republic. – J. Veget. Sci. 6: 711–718. Pyšek P., Sádlo J. & Mandák B. (2002): Saturation of Czech flora with alien species: a historical pattern. – In: Child L. E., Brock J. H., Brundu G., Prach K., Pyšek P. & Williamson M. (eds), Proc. Ecology and management of plant invasions, Backhuys Publ., Leiden (in press).

130

Preslia 74: 97–186, 2002

Regal P. J. (1986): Models of genetically engineered organisms and their ecological impact. – In: Mooney H. A. & Drake J. A. (eds), Ecology of biological invasions of North America and Hawaii, p. 111–132, Ecological Studies 58, Springer Verlag, New York. Rejmánek M. (1996): A theory of seed plant invasiveness: the first sketch. – Biol. Conserv. 78: 171–181. Rejmánek M. (2000): Invasive plants: approaches and predictions. – Austral Ecol. 25: 497–506. Rejmánek M. & Richardson D. M. (1996): What attributes make some plant species more invasive? – Ecology 77: 1655–1661. Rejmánek M., Richardson D. M., Barbour M. G., Crawley M. J., Hrusa G. F., Moyle P. B., Randall J. M., Simberloff D. & Williamson M. (2002): Biological invasions: politics and the discontinuity of ecological terminology. – Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 83: 131–133. Richardson D. M., Pyšek P., Rejmánek M., Barbour M. G., Panetta F. D. & West C. J. (2000): Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. – Diversity & Distributions 6: 93–107. Roubal A. (1968): Oenothera rubricaulis Kleb. – nový neofyt československé květeny. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 3: 138–140. Roubal A. (1970): Příspěvek k synantropní květeně Kladenska. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 5: 101–106. Roubal A. (1972): Předběžná zpráva o výskytu pupalky Oenothera fallax Renner em. Rostański, nového taxonu československé synantropní květeny. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 7: 73–78. Roubal A. (1984): Reseda phyteuma L. v Čechách. – Severočes. Přír. 15: 1–22. Rydlo J. (2000): Echinocystis lobata se šíří podél Labe. – Vlast. Zprav. Polabí 34: 190–194. Rydlo J. (1992): Vodní makrofyta rybníků a tůní na Křivoklátsku. – Muzeum a Současnost, ser. natur., 6: 109–178. Rydlo J. (2001): Změny ve výskytu vodních makrofyt v některých českých a moravských řekách v poslední čtvrtině 20. století. – Muzeum a Současnost, ser. natur., 15: 51–78. Ryves T. B., Clement E. J. & Foster M. C. (1996): Alien grasses of the British Isles. – Botanical Society of the British Isles, London. [181 pp.] Řehořek V. (1974): Epilobium nerteroides A. Cunn. v Československu. – Acta Inst. Bot. Acad. Sci. Slov., ser. A, 1: 95–99. Řehořek V. (1997): Pěstované a zplanělé druhy rodu Helianthus v Evropě. – Preslia 69: 59–70. Řehořek V. (2002): Bromus carinatus Hook. et Arn. – In: Hadinec J., Lustyk P. & Procházka F. (eds.), Additamenta ad floram Reipublicae Bohemicae. I., Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 37 (in press). Sádlo J. & Storch D. (2000): Biologie krajiny. Biotopy České republiky. – Vesmír, Praha. [94 pp.] Saul J. (1983): Vicia onobrychioides L. – nový druh československé květeny. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 18: 26. Sekera W. F. (1854): Wanderungen durch die Hallen der Natur. – Lotos 4: 38–41. Schippman U. (1991): Revision der europäischen Arten der Gattung Brachypodium Palisot de Beauvois (Poaceae). – Boissiera 45: 1–250. Schmidt F. W. (1793–1794): Flora Boëmica inchoata … Cent. 1–4. – Pragae. Schroeder F. G. (1969): Zur Klassifizierung der Anthropochoren. – Vegetatio 16: 225–238. Skalická A. (1993): Genistella sagittalis in Czech and Slovak Republics. – Novit. Bot. Univ. Carol. 7 (1991–1992): 51–57. Skalický V. (1950–1951): Kejklířka pižmová, Mimulus moschatus Dougl., na Kdyňsku a rozšíření kejklířek v jz. Čechách. – Čs. Bot. Listy 3: 122–123. Skalický V. (1968): Studie o evropských druzích rodu Lycopus L. – Sborn. Nár. Muz., ser. B, 24: 185–216. Skalický V. (1972): Líčidlo jedlé (Phytolacca esculenta van Houtte), nový zplanělý druh květeny ČSSR a NDR a rozšíření druhů Phytolacca esculenta van Houtte a P. americana L. v ČSSR. – Preslia 44: 364–369. Skalický V. (1973): Viola cornuta L., nová adventivní violka v ČSSR. – Preslia 45: 147–150. Skalický V., Slavík B. & Smejkal M. (1988): Stručná historie floristicko-fytogeografického výzkumu. – In: Hejný S. & Slavík B. (eds.), Květena České socialistické republiky 1, p. 19–30, Academia, Praha. Skřivánek V. (1949): Vicia lutea L. zavlečená na Moravě. – Čs. Bot. Listy 2: 14–15. Slavík B. (1969): Rozšíření čechřice vonné [Myrrhis odorata (L.) Scop.] v povodí Jizery. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 4: 20–25. Slavík B. (1986): Epilobium dodonaei Vill. in der Tschechoslowakei. – Preslia 58: 307–308. Slavík B. (1988): Fytogeografická charakteristika. – In: Hejný S. & Slavík B. (eds.), Květena České socialistické republiky 1, p. 65–102, Academia, Praha. Slavík B. (ed.) (1995–2000): Květena České republiky. Vol. 4 (1995), 5 (1997), 6 (2000). – Academia, Praha. [529+568+770 pp.] Slavík B. (1996a): Rod Impatiens v České republice. – Preslia 67 (1995): 193–211. Slavík B. (1996b): Erodium botrys – a new species in the flora of the Czech Republic. – Preslia 67 (1995): 305–309. Slavík B. (1996c): Erodium neuradifolium – a new species in the flora of the Czech Republic. – Preslia 68: 173–176. Slavík B. (1996d): Andělika lékařská – úspěšná invazní rostlina na Labi. – Živa 44: 62–64. Slavík B. (1997a): Verbreitung von Geranium-Arten (subgen. Geranium) in Tschechien. – Preslia 68 (1996): 305–321.

Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic

131

Slavík B. (1997b): Verbreitung von Geranium subgen. Robertium und subgen. Erodioideae in Tschechien. – Preslia 69: 311–326. Slavík B. (2001): Impatiens parviflora f. albescens v Čechách. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 36: 69–71. Slavík B. & Lhotská M. (1967): Chorologie und Verbreitungsbiologie von Echinocystis lobata (Michx.) Torr et Gray mit besonderer Berücksichtigung ihres Vorkommens in der Tschechoslowakei. – Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 2: 255–282. Slavíková Z., Chrtek J. & Křísa B. (1972): Poznámky k rozšíření štěničníku paprskujícího – Bifora radians M. Bieb. v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 7: 83–88. Smejkal M. (1952): Hlavatka vyvýšená – Cephalaria elata (Hornem.) Schrad. – naše nová adventivní rostlina. – Čs. Bot. Listy 4 (1951–1952): 81–82. Smejkal M. (1959): Geum macrophyllum × urbanum (Geum ×gajewskii nom. nov.) jako spontánní bastard také v Československu. – Preslia 31: 8–13. Smejkal M. (1966): Neue oder wenig bekannte Pflanzen der tschechoslowakischen Flora II. – Preslia 38: 249–262. Smejkal M. (1968): Pěstovaná a zplanělá „rdesna“ z rodů Polygonum, Bilderdykia, Reynoutria a Polygonum. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 3: 1–6. Smejkal M. (1970): K výskytu Veronica acinifolia L. v ČSSR. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 5: 81–84. Smejkal M. (1973): K výskytu Silene viridiflora L. a křížence Silene nutans (subsp. nutans) × viridiflora na Moravě. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 5: 81–84. Smejkal M. (1974): Epilobium ×novae-civitatis hybr. nova (E. adenocaulon × hirsutum), ein neuer Bastard. – Preslia 46: 64–66. Smejkal M. (1975a): Galeobdolon argentatum sp. nova, ein neuer Vertreter der Kollektivart Galeobdolon luteum (Lamiaceae). – Preslia 47: 241–248. Smejkal M. (1975b): K výskytu Duchesnea indica (Andrews) Focke v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 10: 17–18. Smejkal M. (1978): Rod Symphytum v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 13: 145–161. Smejkal M. (1986): Vrbovka cizí a její pozoruhodná expanze v Československu. – Živa 34: 84–85. Smejkal M. (1988): K výskytu a rozšíření Geum aleppicum Jacq. v Českých zemích. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 23: 1–10. Smejkal M. (1989a): Crambe abyssinica v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 24: 15–19. Smejkal M. (1989b): Ještě k otázce rozšíření Geum aleppicum v ČSR. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 24: 101–104. Smejkal M. (1994): Berteroa stricta Boiss. et Heldr. jako adventivní rostlina v Československu. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 27 (1992): 13–15. Smejkal M. (1995): Sieben neue Bastarde in der Gattung Epilobium L. (Onagraceae). – Acta Mus. Morav., sci. natur., 79: 81–84. Smrček K. & Malina J. (1984): Filipendula kamtschatica (Pall.) Maxim. – nový zplanělý druh v ČSSR. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 19: 81–86. Soják J. (1962): Novinky československé květeny. – Preslia 34: 403–404. Stace C. (1991): New flora of British Isles. – Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. [1226 pp.] Stace C. (1997): New Flora of the British Isles. Ed. 2. – Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. [1130 pp.] Stanzel J. (1994): Nová lokalita Epilobium komarovianum na Moravě. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 28: 79–80. Suda J. (1999): Výskyt Linaria arvensis na Blatensku. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 34: 73–75. Suda J. (2001): Znovunalezené druhy naší květeny. Lnice rolní. – Živa 44 (87): 17–20. Sukopp H. & Sukopp U. (1995): Reynoutria sachalinensis in Europe and in the Far East: a comparison of the species ecology in its native and adventive distribution range. – In: Pyšek P., Prach K., Rejmánek M. & Wade M. (eds.), Plant invasions: General aspects and special problems, p. 151–159, SPB Academic Publ. Amsterdam. Sutorý K. (1976): Vicia bithynica (L.) L. také v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 11: 29. Sutorý K. (1982): Rozšíření Euclidium syriacum (L.) R. Br. a Myagrum perfoliatum L. v Československu. – Čas. Morav. Mus., sci. natur., 67: 119–123. Sutorý K. (1993): Minute contributions to the Czechoslovak flora IV. – Acta Mus. Morav., sci. nat., 77 (1992): 143–146. Sutorý K. (2000): Štětinec laločnatý (Echinocystis lobata) zplanělý na západní Moravě. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 35: 35–37. Sutorý K. (2001): Onopordum ×beckianum John, the correct name for the hybrid of Onopordum acanthium and O. illyricum. – Preslia 73: 185–187. Suza J. (1939): Teucrium scorodonia na Moravě a Slovensku. – Věda Přír. 19: 209–210. Svobodová Z. & Řehořek V. (1996): Příspěvek k problematice amerických druhů rodu Bromus L. ser. Ceratochloa (Beauv.) Griseb. v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 31/Mater. 13: 39–41. Šachl J. (1969): Ambrosia trifida L. – ambrosie trojklanná v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 4: 126–127. Šourková M. (1976): Rod Bupleurum v Československu. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 11: 1–16. Šourková M. (1978): Linikolní plevel Silene cretica subps. annulata. – Preslia 50: 93–95.

132

Preslia 74: 97–186, 2002

Šourková M. (1981): Bupleurum rotundifolium – jeho dřívější a současné rozšíření v Československu. – Stud. ČSAV 1981/20: 95–97. Štěpánek J. (1983): Erucastrum gallicum a E. nasturtiifolium v českých zemích. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 18: 27–42. Štěpánek J. (1998): Máty (Pulegium a Mentha) v České republice. I. Původní a zplaňující druhy. II. Kříženci. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 33: 1–28, 101–144. Štěpánková J. (1999): Ojedinělý nález druhu Salvia spinosa v České republice. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 34: 51–55. Šuk V. (2001): Zajímavé rostliny cizího původu na Karlštějnsku. – Zprav. Ochr. Přír. Okr. Praha-západ 22: 32–34. Thellung A. (1905): Einteilung der Ruderal- und Adventivflora in genetische Gruppen. – In: Naegeli O. & Thellung A., Die Flora des Kanton Zürich, 1. Teil. Die Ruderal- und Adventivflora des Kanton Zürich, Vjschr. Naturforsch. Ges. Kanton Zürich 50: 232–236. Thompson K., Bakker J. P. & Bekker R. M. (1997): The soil seed banks of North West Europe: methodology, density and longevity. – Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. [288 pp.] Toman J. & Starý F. (1966): Lythrum junceum Banks et Soland. in Russ. – eine in die Tschechoslowakei neu eingeschleppte Art. – Preslia 38: 263–266. Toman J., Kolbek J. & Petříček V. (1983): K výskytu Digitalis lanata v Dolním Pojizeří. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 18: 43–48. Trávníček B. (1998): Notes on the taxonomy of Pseudolysimachion sect. Pseudolysimachion (Scrophulariaceae) in Europe. I. P. incanum and P. spicatum. – Preslia 70: 193–223. Trávníček B. (2001): Rozrazily rodu Pseudolysimachion v České republice. II. Rozšíření druhů sekce Pseudolysimachion a kříženců. – Preslia 73: 245–272. Tutin T. G., Heywood V. H., Burges N. A., Moore D. M., Valentine D. H., Walters S. M. & Webb D. A. (eds.) (1964–1980): Flora Europaea. Vols. 1–5. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Uhrová A. (1928): Jak se dostal trnovník do Evropy. – Příroda 21: 8–9. Unar J. (1978): Zajímavější nálezy antropofytů v Brně a v Ostravě. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 13: 196–198. Vaněček J. (1973): Je známa žlutokvětá Ballota nigra L. subsp. nigra? – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 8: 209. Vicherek J. (1966): Lagedium tataricum (L.) Soják na jižní Moravě. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 1: 163–164. Vicherek J., Antonín V., Danihelka J., Grulich V., Gruna B., Hradílek Z., Řehořek V., Šumberová K., Vampola P. & Vágner A. (2000): Flóra a vegetace na soutoku Moravy a Dyje. – Masaryk University, Brno. [362 pp.] Vila ` M., Weber E. & D’Antonio C. M. (2000): Conservation implications of invasion by plant hybridization. – Biol. Invas. 2: 207–217. Vojta F. (1970): Výskyt tromínu prorostlého (Smyrnium perfoliatum L.) v blízkém okolí Teplic. – Zpr. Čs. Bot. Společ. 5: 192–193. Vopravil B. (1950–1951): Erechtites hieraciifolia Raf. na Soběslavsku. – Čs. Bot. Listy 3: 131–132. Vraštil J. (1952): Netýkavka malokvětá. – Čs. Bot. Listy 5: 28–29. Walters S. M. et al. (eds.) (1984–1989): European Garden flora. Vol. 1 (1986), 2 (1984), 3 (1989). – Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. Webb D. A. (1985): What are the criteria for presuming native status? – Watsonia 15: 231–236. Weber E. (1999): Gebietsfremde Arten der Schweizer Flora – Ausmass und Bedeutung. – Bauhinia 13: 1–10. Weber E. F. (1997): The alien flora of Europe: a taxonomic and biogeographic overview. – J. Veget. Sci. 8: 565–572. Wells M. J., Balsinhas A. A., Joffe H., Engelbrecht V. M. & Harding G. (1986): A catalogue of problem plants in southern Africa. – Mem. Bot. Surv. S. Afr. 53: 1–658. Williamson M. (1996): Biological invasions. – Chapman & Hall, London. [244 pp.] Williamson M. (1999): Invasions. – Ecography 22: 5–12. Williamson M. (2001): Can the impacts of invasive species be predicted? – In: Groves R. H., Panetta F. D. & Virtue J. G. (eds.), Weed risk assessment, p. 20–33, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria. Williamson M. (2002): Alien plants in the British Isles. – In: Pimentel D. (ed.), Biological invasions: Economic and environmental costs of alien plant, animal and microbe spedes, p. 91–112, CRC Press, Boca Raton. Zajac A. (1979): Pochodzenie archeofitów wystepujacych w Polsce. – Rozpr. Habil. Uniw. Jagiell. Krakow 29: 1–213. Zlámalík J. (1996): Pentaglottis sempervirens (Boraginaceae) roste i v České republice. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 31: 77–78. Žíla V. & Chán V. (2001): Výskyt druhu Rubus canadensis v jižní části Čech. – Zpr. Čes. Bot. Společ. 35 (2000): 193. Received 14 January 2002 Revision received 28 March 2002 Accepted 15 April 2002

Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic

133

Appendix 1. – List of alien taxa of the Czech flora. Species are arranged alphabetically. Family codes (Fam) are formed by initial letters of the family name. The following information is given for each species, if available: Invasive status (Stat): cas = casual, nat = naturalized, inv = invasive. Post-invasive status (see text for explanation) is indicated by an asterisk. Species which are supposed to grow in the wild as relics of former cultivation (in all or majority of their localities) are followed by #. Residence time (Res): ar = archaeophyte; if known, period of the earliest evidence is indicated: N – Neolithic/Aeneolithic period (5300–2200 B. C.), B – Bronze Age (2200–750 B. C.), I – Iron Age (750–0 B. C.), R – Roman period and Migration period (0–550), P – prehistoric times (5300 B.C.–550), M – Medieval period (550–1500); neo = neophyte. Date of the first reported occurence in the wild (1st). Habitat type is expressed as combination of two criteria: 1. Land-use: N = natural habitats, i.e. natural forests and naturally treeless habitats; S = seminatural habitats, i.e. managed landscape except of settlements, communications, and arable land; H = human-made habitats (Chytrý et al. 2001). 2. Landscape classification: T = traditional agricultural landscape; M – modern urban and industrial landscape. For some species, there were not enough data to classify the habitat type. Syntaxa in which the species occurs; alliances of the Zurich-Montpellier school are listed and their codes are explained below (see Chytrý et al. 2001 for authors’ names). Abundance type in the wild at the territory of the country (Abund): s = single locality, r = rare, sc = scattered, la = locally abundant, c = common, e = extinct (if no records have been known for a long period), se = single locality, now extinct. LocNo: quantitative estimate of the number of localities using the scale of Clement & Foster (1994): 1 = 1–4 localities; 2 = 5–14; 3 = 15–49; 4 = 50–499; 5 = over 500 localities. The system used here is based on the number of separate localities from which the species has been recorded, in print, on herbarium labels, or privately communicated during the 20th century; above 15, the number of localities is an estimate. Minimum arbitrary distance between localities in order to be considered as separate was 1 km. Introduction mode (Intr) of the species into the country: d = deliberate (by planting); a = accidental; ad = both means. For hybrids, those spontaneously originated at the territory of the Czech Republic are considered as “accidental”, whereas hybrids escaped from cultivation are considered “deliberate”. Origin: E = Europe, AS = Asia, AMN = North America, AMC = Central America, AMS = South America, AF = Africa, AU = Australia; if not given, the taxon is of a hybrid origin or it is obscure. Life history (LH): a = annual, af = annual fern, ap = parasitic or semiparasitic annual, b = biennial, bp = parasitic biennial, pe = perennial, ss = semi-shrub, s = shrub, t = tree, f = fern (in multiple entries, the life form more common at the territory is given first). Species in which the life form is not possible to determine such as hybrids of parents belonging to different life forms are indicated by questionmark. Source: F – Flora of the Czech Republic, Vol. 1–6 (Hejný & Slavík 1988–1992, Slavík 1995–2000), K – Key to the flora of the Czech Republic (Kubát et al. 2002); as accounts published in the Flora are more detailed, reference to the Key is only given if the Flora does not cover the taxon. Additional source is only given if there is a detailed specialized literature account on the species or if the species is reported neither in F nor in K. Detailed information on taxa which represent either additions to the Czech flora or the first record of escape from cultivation is given at the end of the Appendix together with other remarks on e.g. invasion status, history, or taxonomy. Codes of syntaxa: Ab – Arabidopsion thalianae; Ad – Adenostylion; Ae – Aegopodion podagrariae; AF – Alysso-Festucion pallentis; Ah – Aphanion; Ai – Alnion incanae; Al – Arction lappae; An – Alnion glutinosae; Ap – Alopecurion pratensis; AQ – Aceri tatarici-Quercion; Ar – Arrhenatherion; AS – Alysso alyssoidis-Sedion albi; At – Atropion; Bd – Berberidion; Bf – Batrachion fluitantis; Bi – Bidention tripartitae; BR – Balloto nigrae– Robinion; Br – Bromion erecti; BS – Balloto-Sambucion; CA – Convolvulo-Agropyrion; Cb – Chenopodion rubri; CE – Carici piluliferae-Epilobion angustifolii; Cl – Caucalidion lappulae; Cm – Cymballario-Asplenion; CM – Cardamino-Montion; Co – Corynephorion canescentis; Cr – Carpinion; CR – Chelidonio-Robinion; Ct – Calthion; Cy – Cynosurion; DM – Dauco-Melilotion; DS – Diantho lumnitzeri-Seslerion albicantis; EC – Euphorbio-Callunion; Er – Eragrostion; Es – Eleocharition soloniensis; Fg – Fagion; Fv – Festucion valesiacae; GA – Galio-Alliarion; Ge – Genistion; GQ – Genisto germanicae-Quercion; Gs – Geranion sanguinei; HF – Helianthemo cani-Festucion pallentis; HS – Hyperico perforati-Scleranthion perennis; IS – Impatienti-Stachyion sylvaticae; KP – Koelerio-Phleion phleoidis; Le – Lemnion minoris; LF – Luzulo-Fagion; Ma – Magnocaricion elatae; Mn – Malvion neglectae; Mp – Magnopotamion; MP – Matricario-Polygonion arenastri; Na – Nardion; NA – Nardo-Agrostion tenuis; Nc – Nanocyperion flavescentis; NJ – Nardo-Juncion squarrosi; Oa – Onopordion acanthii; Pa – Potentillion anserinae; Pe – Petasition officinalis; PF – Plantagini-Festucion ovinae; Ph – Phalaridion arundinaceae; Pp – Parvopotamion; Pr – Phragmition; PR – Pruno-Rubion radulae; PS – Panico-Setarion; Ps – Prunion spinosae; PT – Polygono-Trisetion; Qp – Quercion pubescenti-petraeae; Qt – Quercion petraeae; Ra – Rumicion alpini; Sa – Salicion albae; Sc – Stipion calamagrostis; Se – Salicion elaeagno-daphnoidis; Sf – Senecion fluviatilis; SG – Sparganio-Glycerion fluitantis; Sg – Saginion procumbentis; Sh – Sherardion; Si – Sisymbrion officinalis; SJ – Scorzonero-Juncion gerardii; Sn – Scleranthion annui; SO – Spergulo-Oxalidion; Sr – Salsolion ruthenicae; SS – Sambuco-Salicion capreae; St – Salicion triandrae; Sx – Salicion incanae; TA – Tilio-Acerion; Th – Thero-Airion; Tm – Trifolion medii; Vc – Violion caninae; Ve – Veronico-Euphorbion; VT – Veronico politae-Taraxacion.

Acer saccharinum L.) G. Alyssum murale W.) Schreber Ajuga glabra C.) P. Alnus rugosa (Duroi) Sprengel Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. Alchemilla sericata Reichenb. et K. subsp. B. Agrostemma githago L. Aethusa cynapium L. Amaranthus blitoides S.) Desv. Althaea hirsuta L. saueri Jehlík Amaranthus crispus (Lesp. Achnatherum calamagrostis (L. Allium moly L. Agropyron pectinatum (M. et K. Allium cepa L. Allium paradoxum (M. Achillea filipendulina Lamk. Alhagi pseudalhagi (M. Acer monspessulanum L. Aconitum ×cammarum L.) P. Alyssum rostratum Steven Amaranthus ×alleizettei Aellen Amaranthus acutilobus Uline et Bray Amaranthus albus L. et K. Terracc. Acer ginnala Maxim.) N. Bieb.134 Taxon Abutilon theophrasti Med.) DC. Achillea crithmifolia W. Alchemilla mollis (Buser) Rothm. Alchemilla speciosa Buser Alchemilla tytthantha Juz. Aegilops cylindrica Host Aegilops geniculata Roth Aesculus ×carnea Hayne Aesculus hippocastanum L. Alchemilla conjuncta Bab. Acer negundo L. Adonis aestivalis L. Adonis annua L. Allium atropurpureum W. Allium sativum L. Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle Ajuga chamaepitys (L. Presl Alcea rosea L. Bieb. 2002 1st 1894 2001 2001 1875 1886 1986 1819 1809 1962 1874 Landuse H H H NSH H S H N NSH NS H H H H H H H SH H H H H H H NSH H H H S H H H SH H S S H H H NSH H SH S NS H H H H H H H SH H H H H H Landscape TM M M TM TM T M T T T M T T T TM TM M TM T TM M T TM T TM T T TM T TM TM TM TM M T T TM TM T T TM TM T T TM M T M M M TM TM TM TM M M TM 1963 1823 2001 1874 1880 1985 1963 1946 1922 1867 1872 1966 1870 1897 1945 1909 1893 1931 1948 1838 1926 . Amaranthus bouchonii Thell. Don Allium porrum L. Allium fistulosum L. Althaea armeniaca Ten. et Thév. Agrostis gigantea Roth Agrostis scabra Willd. B. Amaranthus caudatus subsp. Fam Mal Ace Ace Ace Ace Com Com Gra Ran Ara Com Ran Ran Ran Gra Gra Hip Hip Api Com Gra Car Gra Gra Sim Lam Lam Mal Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Fab Alli Alli Alli Alli Alli Alli Alli Alli Alli Bet Gra Mal Mal Bra Bra Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Stat cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas nat* nat cas nat* cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas nat* nat cas inv nat* nat nat cas# cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas nat nat nat nat cas cas nat cas cas cas nat nat nat cas cas cas Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arB neo ar neo neo neo neo arN neo neo arN neo neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Acroptilon repens (L. Allium tuberosum Rottl. Watson Amaranthus blitum L. Bieb. annua Adonis flammea Jacq. Ageratum houstonianum Mill. ex Spreng. Acorus calamus L. Allium atroviolaceum Boiss.

Sutorý 1993 K F K. Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998 F. Hejný et al. Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998 F F F K K F F F K K F K F F F F F F F F F Krahulec in prep. Krahulec in prep.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 135 LH a st t t t pe pe pe pe pe pe a a a a a t t a pe pe a pe pe t ab a b pe b pe pe pe ss pe pe ss pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe s a pe a pe a a a a a a a a a Source F. 1973. Pyšek & Mandák 1998a K. Hejný 1971. 1973. Jehlík 1998 F F F F K K. Dostál 1948-1950. Hejný et al. Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998 F. 1973. Jehlík 1998 F F F F Syntaxa Si Er Abund LocNo Intr r s r la s r se r sc sc r sc r r r r r la c r r r sc s sc r e r s r s s r se s se r r r r r sc se r r e e r e r e sc sc sc e sc r 3 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 4 5 1 5 2 3 1 1 1 4 5 1 1 4 4 1 4 4 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 3 2 ad d d d d a d a d a a a d a a a d d a d a a a a d ad a d d d d d d a d a d d d d d d d d a a a d a a d a a a a d a Origin AS AS E AMN AMN E AS E AS E AS E AS AF E AF E AS E E E E AS AMC AMS E E AS E AS AMN AS E AF E AS E AS E E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS AS AS E E AS AS AS AMN E AS E AS E AS E E AMN AMN AMN E AF AMN AMS AMS Ai Sa BS CR Ae Ph Pe Pr Cl Cl BS Sh Sh Cl Ah Pa Si Ph SJ SS Cl Oa DM Cl Oa VE Pa Al Si VE VE CA Si PS Er Mn MP Mn VE Si Si MP . 1973. Krahulec in prep. F K. 1984 K K Dostál 1948-1950. Smejkal 1966 F F F F F F. K K K K.Pyšek et al.

) Arcang.) P. subsp. 2002 1st 1834 1905 1912 1965 1961 1853 1943 1908 1853 1910 1818 1967 1909 1909 1964 1883 1999 1877 1898 1987 1932 Landuse H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H S SH H H S H H H H H NSH H SH NSH H H NSH H H H H H H SH NSH H H H SH SH SH SH H NS H NS H H Landscape TM M M TM M M TM M M TM N TM M M M M M M M T TM TM TM TM T T T T TM T TM T T T TM T M T T T T T T T T TM T T T T TM TM T TM T TM TM 1953 1887 1517 1973 1883 1834 1819 1957 . Androsace elongata L. Apera spica-venti (L. Aquilegia atrata Koch Arabis alpina L. Amorpha fruticosa L. Androsace maxima L.) Hoffm.) Beck Arctium ×cimbricum (Krause) Hayek Arctium lappa L. Bieb. Arabis procurrens W. Watson Amaranthus powellii S. Amaranthus palmeri S. Arctium ×ambiguum (Čelak. Amaranthus ×ozanonii Thell. subsp. Ammi majus L. et K. Amaranthus ×turicensis Thell. Arabis caucasica Willd. Anagallis arvensis L. sylvestris (Vill.) Pers.) Bernh. Anthemis arvensis L. Anagallis ×doerfleri Ronniger Anagallis foemina Miller Anagallis monelli L. subsp. Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) Brenan Amaranthus graecizans subsp. Anthemis cotula L. trichosperma (Schult. Ambrosia psilostachya DC. Anthoxanthum aristatum Boiss. B. cerefolium Anthriscus cerefolium subsp.) Bentham Anchusa azurea Mill. Arctium ×mixtum (Simk. Schulye) Rouy Arctium minus (Hill.) Lam. Ammi visnaga (L. Anthriscus caucalis M. Anchusa officinalis L. Amaranthus hypochondriacus L. archangelica Anoda cristata (L. Amaranthus rudis Sauer Amaranthus spinosus L.136 Taxon Amaranthus cruentus L. Angelica archangelica L. Apium graveolens L. Amaranthus graecizans L. Amaranthus viridis L. graecizans Amaranthus graecizans subsp. Anthriscus cerefolium (L. thellungianus (Nevski) Gusev Amaranthus hybridus L. Amelanchier lamarckii Schroeder Amelanchier ovalis Med. Antirrhinum majus L.) Schlecht. Watson Amaranthus quitensis Kunth Amaranthus retroflexus L. Arctium ×maassii (M. Anethum graveolens L. Amaranthus deflexus L. Ambrosia trifida L. Anaphalis margaritacea (L.) Nyman Fam Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Ama Com Com Com Ros Ros Api Api Fab Com Pri Pri Pri Pri Com Bor Bor Pri Pri Api Api Mal Com Com Com Gra Api Api Api Scr Gra Api Ran Bra Bra Bra Com Com Com Com Com Com Stat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas inv cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas nat* cas nat* cas cas cas nat* nat* nat* cas inv cas nat* nat* nat* cas nat* cas nat* nat inv cas cas nat nat cas cas cas nat* cas nat cas Res neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN ar ar neo neo neo arR ar ar ar neo neo ar ar arM neo arP neo ar neo ar ar neo neo neo neo ar ar arB ar arM ar Preslia 74: 97–186. Anacyclus clavatus (Desf. Anthemis austriaca Jacq.

Jehlík 1998 F F F F F F. 1973. 1973. Červinka & Sádlo 2000 K. Hejný et al. Čelakovský 1881 F F F F K F F F F K F F F F F F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 137 LH Source F F F F F F. Grüll & Priszter 1969 F F F F.Pyšek et al. Jehlík 1998 K. Jehlík 1998 K. Jehlík & Rostański 1975 F K K K K F F F F K F F F F F K K K K K K Syntaxa Si MP VE PS Si VE Si VE Si VE Si VE PS Er Si Si VE PS Er Abund LocNo Intr r r e e e r r sc r la e c r r r r la s sc r r r e la e c r sc e r r sc r e sc la r c sc sc r r r la r c r r r r r sc r c sc c sc 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 5 1 5 2 1 1 2 5 1 3 1 3 2 1 3 1 5 4 5 1 3 2 5 4 2 5 5 2 5 5 5 1 4 4 4 3 5 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 5 5 5 5 d a a a a a d a a a a a a a a a a a a d d ad a d d a a a a d a a a a d d a a a a a a d ad d a d d d d d a a a a a a Origin AMC AMS AMS E AS AF E E AS AMN AMC AMS AMC AMS PS Sr DM Si Cl Sh Si VE SO Cl Cl GQ SS CE Ae Oa CA DM Ab AS Cl Cl Si Sf Pe Ae Ah Sh Cl Sh Cl Mn GA Si GA GA BS BR Cm PS Ah Sn Si Cm Cm Cy AS Al At IS Ae Al At IS Ae Al Al a pe a a a a a a AMN a AMC AMS a AMS a AMN AMC a AMN a AMC AMS a a AMS a AMN a AMN AMS pe AMN AMC a AMN st E AS s E AS a E AS a AMN s E a E a a E AS a E a AMS AS pe E AS pe E b pe E a E AS AF a E AS a E AS b pe AMN AMC AMS a pe E a E a E a E a E AS AF a E AS a E AS a E a pe E AS a E AS AF b E pe E AF pe E pe E pe pe pe E pe pe E pe pe . Hejný et al. 1973. Hejný et al. Hejný et al. 1973 K.

.) Levyns Argemone mexicana L. Aster divaricatus L.138 Taxon Arctium ×neumannii Rouy Arctium ×nothum (Ruhmer) Weiss Arctium tomentosum Mill. Asperula arvensis L. Aster bellidiastrum (L. Aster novae-angliae L. group Chinensis Fam Com Com Com Com Pap Plu Bra Com Gra Gra Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Asc Bor Rub Rub Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Sax Fab Fab Api Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Bra Gra Gra Gra Gra Stat cas cas nat* cas cas cas# nat nat cas inv cas nat* cas nat cas cas cas cas nat* cas nat nat nat nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas inv nat inv inv cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas inv nat* nat* inv cas nat* cas# cas nat* cas cas Res ar ar arB neo neo neo ar ar neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo ar arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar arM arP ar arP neo ar neo neo arB neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Aster macrophyllus L. Artemisia sieversiana Willd. 2002 1st Landuse NS H H H H SH NSH SH SH NSH H NSH N H H H H H SH H SH H H H H H H H H H SH SH H SH SH SH SH SH N S S H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H Landscape T TM TM M M T TM T TM TM TM T T M M T TM M T M T M M T T T TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM TM T T T T M TM M TM TM TM TM TM M TM T TM TM T TM 1965 1890 1867 1897 1971 1872 1972 1947 1901 1905 1867 1851 1850 1872 1872 1999 1872 1847 1967 1872 1977 1963 1867 . Aubrieta deltoides (L. Artemisia scoparia W.) Schübl. Artemisia dracunculus L. M.) Willd. Aster lanceolatus Willd. et K. Asperugo procumbens L. Aster versicolor Willd. Atriplex rosea L. Artemisia verlotiorum Lamotte Asclepias syriaca L. Armeria maritima (Mill. Avena sativa L. Artemisia gnaphalodes Nutt. Presl subsp. Aster parviflorus Nees Aster ×salignus Willd. Atriplex littoralis L. Atriplex patula L. et K. Artemisia biennis Willd. Artemisia alba Turra Artemisia annua L.) DC.) Scop. et Sch. Presl et C. × A. Aster dumosus L. Asperula orientalis Boiss. et Hohen.) Schweigg. Arrhenatherum elatius (L. Atriplex ×northusiana Wein.) J. et Koerte Arrhenatherum elatius subsp. Aster laevis L. bulbosum (Willd. Atriplex oblongifolia W. Avena barbata Pott et Link Avena fatua L. et Mart.) Drude Atriplex heterosperma Bunge Atriplex hortensis L. Artemisia absinthium L. Arnoseris minima (L. novi-belgii L. elatius Artemisia abrotanum L. Arctotheca calendula (L. Astilbe ×arendsii Arends Astragalus alopecuroides L. Atriplex sagittata Borkh. Artemisia repens Willd. Atriplex semilunaris Aellen Atriplex tatarica L. Aster novi-belgii L. Astragalus glycyphylloides DC. Astrodaucus orientalis (L. Armoracia rusticana G. Artemisia tournefortiana Rchb. Aster cordifolius L. Avena nuda L.

Jehlík 1998 F F F F K K K.Pyšek et al. Grüll 1974 K K K. Grüll 1972 K.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 139 LH pe pe pe pe a pe pe pe pe pe s pe pe a pe pe pe pe a a pe pe pe a a a pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe b a a a a a a a a a a pe a a a a Source K K K K F F F K K K K K K K. Gutte & Pyšek 1972. Jehlík 1998 K. Hejný 1964. Hejný et al. 1973 K. Hejný et al. 1973. Jehlík 1980 K K. Pyšek & Vobořil 2002 K K K K K K K K K F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F Dostál 1989 K K K Syntaxa At IS Ae Al Al CA Ar Abund LocNo Intr sc sc c r e e c r r c r sc e r r r se r r r sc r r r e e r r r r r c r r sc sc sc r s e e e r r se r la c r c e la r se c r r 4 5 5 1 1 1 5 4 1 5 1 5 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 3 1 3 3 5 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 5 1 2 4 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 5 5 4 5 1 5 1 1 5 2 2 a a a a a d d a a a d a d d a d a a a a a d d a a ad d d d d d d d d d d d d d a a a a d a a a a a a a a d a a a a Origin Ph Ae Ap Sf Pa Sn Co Ar CA DM Oa Sc Al AF E AF AMC E E E E E E AS E AS AMN AS AMN E AS E E AMN AS AS AMN E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN E Ono Si Si Al DM CA Si Al GA Oa VE Cl Ae Al Ar Ae Al Ar Ae Al Ar Ae Al Ar Ae Sf Ae Al Ar Ae Al Ae Al Ae Al Ar Ae Al Ar Ai Si VE AS E E E AS E AS E E AS AMN E AS AF E AS E AS E AS AU E AS AF E E AS E E Si DM Al CA Si Bi Oa Si Si Si MP Oa Cl Sh Ah Si .

Briza minor L.) Schübl.) Metzger Brassica rapa var.) S. subsp. sylvestris (Lam. Bromus secalinus subsp. Azolla caroliniana Willd. et Cosson Brassica napus L. Bromus briziformis Fisch. Bieb. Basella rubra L. Don) Greene Bolboschoenus glaucus (Lam. group Cicla Beta vulgaris L.) Fritsch Berteroa incana (L. Fam Gra Gra Gra Gra Chen Azo Lam Lam Com Bas Chen Chen Gra Gra Sax Bra Bra Chen Chen Chen Com Com Com Api Poly Cyp Bor Gra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Stat cas nat cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas inv cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat* nat cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas Res neo arB neo ar neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar arM neo neo neo arM neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar ar ar neo neo neo arB neo neo neo ar ar neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar Preslia 74: 97–186. subsp. Bromus scoparius L. integrifolia (L. Brassica elongata Ehrh. pseudothominii (P. Smith Borago officinalis L. Beta trigyna W. Scholz Bromus japonicus Thunb.140 Taxon Avena sativa L. oleifera (DC. Bassia sedoides (Pallas) Aschers. group Sativa Avena sterilis L.) Koch Brassica juncea (L. et Sch. decipiens Bomble et H. Bidens pilosa L.) Briggs Briza maxima L. hordeaceus Bromus hordeaceus subsp. Bromus carinatus Hooker et Arnott Bromus catharticus Vahl Bromus commutatus Schrad. et Heldr. nigra Balsamita major Desf. group Vulgaris Bidens connata Willd. Brachypodium rupestre (Host) R. napus Brassica nigra (L. eruciformis Beckmannia syzigachne (Steud.) Fernald Bergenia crassifolia (L. Smith) H. Bromus lanceolatus Roth Bromus lepidus Holmberg Bromus madritensis L.) DC. et K. multiflorus (Sm. Ballota nigra subsp. Berteroa stricta Boiss. Beta vulgaris L.) Czern. et Mart. elongata Brassica elongata subsp. Bistorta amplexicaulis (D. meridionalis (Béguinot) Béguinot Ballota nigra L. Bifora radians M. Scholz Bromus secalinus subsp.) Koch Brassica oleracea L. Brassica rapa subsp. inermis Leysser Bromus rigidus Roth Bromus riparius Rehmann Bromus rubens L.) Host subsp. G. et Mey. group Praegravis Avena sativa L. Bassia tricuspis F. Mueller Beckmannia eruciformis (L. Bromus hordeaceus L. subsp. Bromus pumpellianus Scribner × B. 2002 1st Landuse H H H H H N H SH H H H H S SH H SH H H H H N NSH H H H H H S SH H H H SH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H N H H H H H Landscape TM TM M TM M T TM TM T M M M T M TM T M M TH TM T TM M T M TM TM T TM M M TM T TM TM TM TM TM T M M M TM TM M T M TM M T M M M T T 1953 1895 1932 1901 1960 1966 1960 1935 1894 1981 1966 1925 1809 1891 1873 1960 1963 1964 1934 1873 1971 1961 1997 1961 . Bromus arvensis L. subsp. Avena strigosa Schreber Axyris amaranthoides L. Bidens frondosa L.

Hejný & Lhotská 1964. 1968a. 1999 F K. Lhotská 1968a F F K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 141 LH a a a a a af pe pe pe pe a a pe a pe a b pe a b pe pe ba ba a a a a pe pe a pe b pe b pe a a a a b pe a ab a a a a a pe a a a a a a a a pe a pe a a a a Source K K K K F F F F K F F F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Hroudová et al. Schippman 1991 F F F F F F F F. Krahulec & Jiřiště 1997 K K K. 1973.Pyšek et al. Lhotská 1968a K. Hejný 1948. Řehořek 2002 K K K K. Vicherek et al. Jehlík et al. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K K Syntaxa Si Ah Ah Sh Cl Le Al Al BR BS Bd PR Abund LocNo Intr r c r r se r r c r e e e r r r c e r r r r c r r r s r se r e r sc la r r r r r r r r r r c r sc se r r s r r se r e e 2 5 2 2 1 1 2 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 1 1 2 4 2 5 1 4 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 5 3 4 4 2 1 2 4 1 1 1 3 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a d a a a d a a d d a a a a d a a d d d a a a a d a d a a a ad d ad a d a d a a ad d a a a a a a a a d a a a a a a Origin E E E E AS AMN E E AS AF AS AS E AS AU E AS AMS AS AS E AS E E AS Oa DM Ab PF Si VE Bi AMN AMN AMN AMC AMS E AS AF AS E AS E AF E E E AS AS E E E E E E E E AS E AS AMN AMS E E E E E E E E E E E AS E AS E AS Cl Oa Si Br Si Si MP Si Sf Pa Si Si Sh Cl Si Cl Si Si DM Cl DM Ct Sh Ah . 2001 K. 2000 K F F F F F F K. Řehořek 2002 K. Svobodová & Řehořek 1996. Gruberová et al. Kühn 1968 K K K K K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Lhotská 1966.

) Smejkal Camelina laxa C. Castanea sativa Mill.) Med. Bunium bulbocastanum L. Bryonia dioica Jacq Buddleja davidii Franchet Bunias erucago L. Johnston Bryonia alba L. Cannabis ×intersita Soják Cannabis ruderalis Janisch. Carduus acanthoides L. Carthamus lanatus L.) Hiitonen Camelina rumelica Velen.) Thell. alyssum Camelina alyssum subsp.) Nees Calystegia pulchra Brummitt et Heywood Camelina alyssum (Mill. Fam Gra Gra Gra Bor Cuc Cuc Bud Bra Bra Api Api Api Bra Bra Lam Lam Lam Lam Por Com Com Com Con Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Cam Cam Cam Cam Cam Cam Can Can Can Bra Bra Bra Bra Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Cyp Com Com Fag Big Com Stat nat* nat* nat* cas inv nat cas cas inv cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat nat nat cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas# cas inv cas nat* nat nat inv nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas Res arB arN arN neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar arN neo ar arM ar arN ar ar ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186.) P. subsp. nepeta Calandrinia compressa DC. M. ex Rouy et Fouc.142 Taxon Bromus secalinus L. Campanula rhomboidalis L. A.) Savi subsp. Bromus tectorum L. Calendula arvensis L. W. 2002 1st Landuse H SH NSH SH SH H H H SH H H H H H H H SH N H H H H SH H H H H SH H H H NS S H S S SH H H H H NSH SH H H NSH H H S H H S H H NS H H Landscape T TM TM T TM TM M M TM T T T TM M TM M T T M TM TM TM T T T M TM T M T T TM T TM TM T T TM M TM TM T TM TM TM T TM T T T M M TM TM T M M 1965 2000 1856 1879 1943 1929 1960 1945 1989 1948 1996 1853 1901 1872 1872 1857 1958 1963 1852 1974 1968 1880 1960 1868 1930 1967 1947 . Camelina sativa (L. Cardamine hirsuta L. Cardaria draba (L. Ball Calamintha nepeta (L. Capsella bursa-pastoris (L. Meyer Camelina microcarpa DC. Campanula speciosa Hornem. Carduus ×sepincola Hausskn. subsp. subsp. Cakile baltica (Jord. sylvestris (Wallr. Campanula ×iserana Kovanda Campanula medium L. Cannabis sativa L. Brunnera macrophylla (Adams) I. microcarpa Camelina microcarpa subsp. Bupleurum rotundifolium L. Calamintha grandiflora (L. Catalpa bignonioides Walter Catananche caerulea L.) Moench Calamintha menthaefolia Host Calamintha nepeta subsp. Bunias orientalis L. integerrima (Čelak. Campanula rapunculus L. Calendula officinalis L. Cardamine chelidonia L. Carduus ×orthocephalus Wallr. sativa Camelina sativa subsp. Carduus crispus L.) Crantz subsp. Carduus ×stangii Buek Carduus tenuiflorus Curtis Carex muskingumensis Schwein. Callistephus chinensis (L. Cakile euxina Pobed. Bupleurum croceum Fenzl.) Desv. Carthamus tinctorius L. glandulosa (Req. zingeri (Mirek) Smejkal Campanula alliariifolia Willd. secalinus Bromus sterilis L.) Pobed. Carduus ×leptocephalus Peterm.

Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998 F Hadinec 2002 F. Kovanda 1999 F F F. Holub 1970 F F F F F. Šourková 1976 F F F F F F F. Kučera 1991 F F K K K K K K Jedlička 1949. Grüll 1952 K K F F K Syntaxa Ah Si BR BS GA Si Co DM Sc GA Al BS CR GA Al Ae BS SS Al CA CA Al Ae Ar Abund LocNo Intr r c c r c sc r r la e se r e e s se s s r r sc r r e e e sc c r e e r s r r r r e la r c r r c la sc r r r r se se s r r r s 4 5 5 2 5 3 1 1 4 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 4 4 3 1 3 5 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 4 5 2 3 5 5 5 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 a a a d d d d ad a ad a a a a d a d d d a d d d a a a a a a d a d a d ad ad d a a d a d a a a a a a a a a a a d d d d Origin E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS AF AS E AS E AS E E AS E AS E E E E E E AMS E AS AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E E E AS AF E E AS AS E E E AS E AS E E AS Cl Si Si Ah Ae Al BS Ah Ah Cl Si DM Cl Si DM Oa Fv Cl Si Cl Si Oa Si Al Si Al MP Ab AS Si Ab Cr GA IS Ae CE CA Si DM Al Oa DM Oa Al Sf Ae St Ph Oa DM Cr GQ E AMN E E AS E AS AMN E . Holub 1971 F F F F F F F F F. 1973. Jehlík 1998 F F F. Kovanda 1996 F F F. Jehlík & Slavík 1968.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 143 LH a a a pe pe pe s b pe b pe pe a a a a pe pe pe pe a a a a pe a a a a a b a a pe pe b b pe pe a a a ab a pe ab pe pe pe pe pe pe pe a pe pe a a t t pe Source K K K F.Pyšek et al. Kovanda & Husová 1976. Šuk 2001 F. Sekera 1854 K K K F.

× C. Murray) Parl. subsp. Chenopodium melanocarpum (J.) Swartz Fam Api Api Cel Ama Ulm Gra Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Val Dip Dip Car Car Car Bor Ros Cup Fab Pap Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Chen Gra Stat nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas# cas# cas# nat* cas cas cas nat* nat cas inv cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat* cas nat* inv nat* cas cas nat cas cas nat nat* nat* nat* cas Res ar arM neo neo neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo arM neo neo neo arN ar neo arN neo arM neo neo neo neo arN neo ar ar arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN arM neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Chenopodium berlandieri subsp. Schulze Cerastium tomentosum L. Chenopodium integrifolium Worosch. Mueller) Bentham Chenopodium opulifolium Schrader Chenopodium pedunculare Bertol. Black Chenopodium missouriense Aellen Chenopodium murale L. Cenchrus echinatus L. Centaurea melitensis L. Chenopodium glaucum L. Centaurea diffusa Lam. Chenopodium quinoa Willd. muricata (Čelak. Centaurea nigra L. Centranthus ruber (L. subsp. Chenopodium acuminatum Willd. Centaurea calcitrapa L. et Sch. cristata (L. Murr) Zobel Chenopodium bonus-henricus L. phrygia L.) Holub Caucalis platycarpos L.) Bobrov Cephalaria syriaca (L.) R. Centaurea cyanus L. Cerastium biebersteinii DC. Centaurea nigra L. Black) J. Chenopodium ambrosioides L. Chenopodium botrys L. Chaenomeles japonica (Thunb. Chenopodium hircinum Schrad. Centaurea nigrescens Willd. Centaurea dealbata Willd.) Aschers. Murr Chenopodium strictum Roth Chenopodium urbicum L. Chloris radiata (L.) O.) Spach Chamaecyparis lawsoniana (A. nigrescens Centaurea ×psammogena (Gáyer) Holub Centaurea solstitialis L. Chenopodium striatiforme J. Chenopodium nitrariaceum (F. Chenopodium foliosum (Moench) Aschers. Br. Kuntze Celtis occidentalis L. Chamaecytisus elongatus (W. 2002 1st Landuse H SH H H H H SH H NH SH H H H SH H H SH NSH SH SH H H S SH SH S N S NSH H H H H SH H SH H NSH H H H H H H H SH SH H H H H H H H H H H Landscape T T M M M M T T TM T M TM TM T M TM T TM TM TM T M TM T T T T T TM M M M T TM TM TM T TM M M M M TM M TM TM TM M M M M M M TM T T M 1902 2001 1872 1872 1966 1823 1823 1880 1951 1948 1986 1953 1835 1809 1834 1957 1840 1963 1963 1890 1966 1864 1961 . platycarpos Celastrus orbiculatus Thunb. Centaurea ×gerstlaueri Erdner Centaurea macrocephala Willd. Chenopodium probstii Aellen Chenopodium prostratum Herder Chenopodium pumilio R. Chenopodium capitatum (L.) Link Chelidonium majus L.144 Taxon Caucalis platycarpos subsp. Celosia argentea var. Chenopodium vulvaria L. Cerastium ×maureri M. et K. Cerinthe minor L. Chenopodium schraderianum Schult. Chenopodium polyspermum L. Cephalaria gigantea (Ledeb.) DC. zschackei (J. Chenopodium ficifolium Sm.

Dostálek 1983 K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 Syntaxa Cl Cl BS Si BS Abund LocNo Intr r r s r r r r sc r r r r e r r r s r r r se sc sc sc sc s r r c e r r c sc r la r sc r r e r sc e sc c c r e sc e r r sc sc sc se 2 5 1 1 1 1 2 5 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 4 4 5 1 1 1 5 1 3 1 5 3 2 5 3 5 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 5 5 3 1 4 1 2 3 5 4 5 1 a a d d d a a a d a a d a a a a a a d d a d ad d a d d d ad a d a ad d d a d a a d a a a a a ad a a a a d d a a a a a Origin E AS E AS AS AMC AS AMN AMN E E E AS E AS E AS E E E E AS E E AS E AS E E E E AS AS AMN E E AS AS AMS AMN E E AS AMN E AS E AS AF E AS AMS AU AMN E AS AU E AS AF E E AS AMN AS AU AMS AF E AS AS E AS E AS AMC AMS Ap Sh Ae Ar DM Fv DM Oa Fv Cm Ar Ae Cm Ar Ar Cm Oa GA GA Ae SS TA Si Si Si Ae Al Ra Pa Si PS Sr Si MP VE Si Cb Bi Si MP VE Cb SJ Si MP Pa Si Si Si Si Mn Si Si Si Al Cb Si VE SO Bi VE Si Si Mn MP Si PS Bi Si Si Si MP Er PS Si Mn Er PS Si Mn MP Si .: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 145 LH a a s a t a a a pe a pe pe a pe pe pe ? a pe pe a pe pe pe b a pe s t s pe a ab a pe a a a ab a a a a a a s a a a a a a a a a a a a a Source F F F. Lhotská & Hejný 1979. Červinka & Sádlo 2000 F K K K K K K K K K K Dostál 1989 K F F. Smejkal 1952 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F. Dostálek 1983 F F F F. Dostálek 1983 F F. Hejný et al.Pyšek et al. Jehlík 1998 F F F F. 1973 F F F F F F F F. Dostálek 1983 F F.

Conringia orientalis (L. ex Huter Cirsium ×soroksarense Wagner Cirsium ×subspinuligerum Peterm.) Simk. Br. regalis Convolvulus arvensis L. emend. subsp. Cochlearia officinalis L. Fam Gra Gra Com Bra Fab Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Cuc Ona Ona Por Por Ran Ran Ran Com Api Bra Com Pole Fab Come Api Bra Ran Ran Ran Con Con Com Com Com Com Com Api Chen Cor Fab Bra Bra Fum Fum Stat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat inv cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas nat nat cas inv nat* cas nat nat* nat* cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas nat cas cas nat* cas nat Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM arP neo ar ar neo ar ar ar ar ar ar ar neo arM neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM arB neo neo ar arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. D. Consolida ajacis (L. Cnicus benedictus L. Clematis tangutica (Maxim. Corispermum leptopterum (Aschers. F. Cirsium ×preiseri Uechtr. Sell Cichorium intybus subsp. Chloris virgata Swartz Chlorocrepis staticifolia (All. fil. subsp. Claytonia alsinoides Sims Claytonia perfoliata Willd. Cirsium vulgare (Savi) Ten. alba Corydalis lutea (L.) Griseb. intybus Cirsium arvense (L. Coriandrum sativum L. Commelina communis L.) Koch Coronopus didymus (L.) Schur Consolida orientalis (Gay) Schrödinger Consolida regalis S.) Iljin Cornus sericea L. W. Chorispora tenella (Pallas) DC. Gray subsp.) Cronq.) All. Cirsium ×aschersonianum Čelak. Murray Coronilla scorpioides (L. Schultz Cirsium ×celakovskyanum Knaf Cirsium echinus (M. Conium maculatum L. Cirsium ×bipontinum F.) Korshinsky Clematis viticella L.146 Taxon Chloris truncata R. Coreopsis tinctoria Nutt. Coronopus squamatus (Forska ˚l) Aschers. Bieb. Cirsium tuberosum (L. 2002 1st 1956 1961 1873 1960 Landuse H H H H H SH H SH SH SH SH SH H SH SH SH SH SH SH SH S SH H H H H H H H H H H H H SH NS H H H H H H NSH H H H H H H H H NSH H H H H H Landscape M M T M TM TM TM TM TM T T T T T T T T T T T T TM TM M M TM N TM T TM TM TM T TM T T TM TM T TM TM T TM TM T M TM T TM TM M TM M M T TM TM 1937 1872 1969 1951 1883 1868 1819 1880 1819 1940 1880 1913 1887 1964 1750 1971 1883 1819 1960 1900 1903 1995 1886 .) Cronq. Cirsium ×gerhardtii Schultz-Bip. Clarkia unguiculata Lindl. Clematis flammula L.) Hand. Cirsium ×reichenbachianum Löhr Cirsium ×sabaudum Löhr Cirsium ×sextinum Ausserd. foliosum (Hegi) Janchen Cichorium intybus L. Conyza canadensis (L. subsp.) Mansf. uralensis (Rouy) P.) Dumort. Cicer arietinum L. squamatus Corydalis alba (Mill. Citrullus lanatus (Thunberg) Matsumura et Nakai Clarkia pulchella Pursh.-Mazz.) Scop. Coleostephus myconis (L. Conyza triloba Decne. Cicerbita macrophylla subsp. ×Conygeron huelsenii (Vatke) Rauschert Conyza bonariensis (L. Collomia grandiflora Lindl. Convolvulus tricolor L.) Sm. Cnidium silaifolium (Jacq. Colutea arborescens L.) DC.) Reichenb.

Čelakovský 1888b K K K K F F F F F F Dostál 1989 F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr e se se r r r r c c se r r e r r r r r r r se c r r r r r r r r r e r se r r sc sc r sc r sc c r r s c se r r e r e r r r sc 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 5 5 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 5 4 3 4 5 5 2 1 1 5 1 2 2 1 3 1 3 5 1 4 a a a a d d d a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a d d d d d d d d d a d d d d d a a ad ad a a d a a a a d d a d a a a d d Origin AS AU AMC AMS E E AS E AS AS E E AS Ae Cy DM Ar Si DM CA VE AS DM Si CE Si VE Qp Bd Si Al Sf Cl Si Ah Sh Cl Sh Si Cl Sh CA DM Oa Cl Sh VE Br E E AS AF AMN AMN AMN AMN AMC E AS AF AS E AS E E AS E E AMN E AS E AS AF E AS AF E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AS E AS AMS AMN AS AF AMN E E AS AMN E AS AF AMS E E E Si Sr PS Ai St MP Si MP Cm Cm . 1973.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 147 LH a a pe a a pe b pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe a a a a a s s s a pe b pe a a s a ab a a a a pe a pe ? a a a pe a a a s a ab ab pe pe Source K. Jehlík 1998 F F F F. Jehlík 1998 F F F K. Štech in prep. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 Dostál 1989.Pyšek et al. F F K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K F F F F. Hejný et al. Procházka 1998 F K F F Dostál 1989 F F K. Holub 1975 F F K. Pilát 1953. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K.

Gray) Crataegus pedicellata Sarg. Datura stramonium L. subsp.. scoparius Dactyloctenium aegypticum (L. Corylus maxima Mill.) Wettst. Crataegus flabellata (Bosc ex Spach) C. Cotula australis (Sieb. Crocus flavus West. Candargy Datura ferox L. Crepis biennis L.) P. M. subsp. ex R. Cotoneaster bullatus Boiss. Fries Crambe maritima L. Cucumis sativus L. B. Cypripedium reginae Walt. subsp. ex Spreng. Cucumis melo L. Crepis nicaeensis Balb.) Torrey Daucus carota subsp. E. Crepis capillaris (L. Descurainia sophia (L. var. et Mart. Crocus chrysanthus Herb. barbatus Dianthus caryophyllus L. Crocus napolitanus Mord. Cynosurus echinatus L. Cosmos bipinnatus Cav.148 Taxon Corylus colurna L.) Pers. foetida Crepis foetida subsp. Cucurbita maxima Duchesne Cucurbita pepo L. Dianthus barbatus L. Koch Crataegus mollis (Torrey et A.) Čelak. muralis Cymbalaria pallida (Ten.) Webb ex Prantl Desmazeria rigida (L. Cystopteris bulbifera (L. Crepis setosa Haller fil.) Wallr. Cydonia oblonga Mill. 2002 1st 2001 1902 1884 2001 1986 1961 1965 1900 1993 Landuse SH H H H H S S H H H N H SH SH S SH SH S SH H SH SH H NSH SH S SH S H H H H H H SH H SH SH H N H S N NSH H H H H H H H H H H H SH H Landscape T M M T M T T M TM TM T M TM T T TM T T TM TM T T TM TM TM T TM T TM TM TM TM TM T T TM TM TM M T TM T T T M TM M TM TM TM TM TM TM M M TM TM 1872 1872 1960 1999 1963 1969 1883 1999 1935 1819 1987 1934 1809 1935 2001 1874 . Crocus heuffelianus Herb. Cynodon dactylon (L. Crataegus persimilis Sarg.) Hook fil. Cotinus coggygria Scop. Cyperus eragrostis Lam. Crambe abyssinica Hochst.) Thell. Datura inoxia Mill. Crepis vesicaria subsp.) Tutin Deutzia scabra Thunb. Fam Bet Bet Com Ana Ros Ros Ros Com Bra Bra Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Com Lil Lil Lil Lil Lil Cuc Cuc Cuc Cuc Con Con Ros Scr Scr Gra Gra Cyp Cyp Orch Dry Fab Gra Com Gra Sol Sol Sol Sol Api Bra Gra Phi Car Car Stat cas cas cas cas# cas cas# cas cas cas cas cas# cas cas cas cas nat* nat cas nat cas nat nat* cas cas# cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv nat cas nat* cas nat* cas cas cas cas# nat# inv* cas cas cas cas cas nat nat cas nat cas cas cas# cas Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar neo ar neo arR ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM ar ar neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arI neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Bieb. Cytisus scoparius (L. Crocus sativus L.) Link subsp. et Sch. Cymbalaria muralis G. Crataegus crus-galli L. tatula (L. Cotoneaster horizontalis Decne Cotoneaster lucidus Schlecht. Crepis foetida L. rhoeadifolia (M. Dahlia pinnata Cav. taraxacifolia (Thuill. Dasypyrum villosum (L.) Schübl. Cyperus rotundus L. Cuscuta campestris Yuncker Cuscuta epilinum Boenn.) P. Crepis tectorum L. stramonium Datura stramonium var.) Bernh. sativus (Hoffm.

Jehlík 1998 F F F F K K K.Pyšek et al. Šuk 2001 K K K K F F F F F. Šuk 2001 Marek & Procházka 2002 F K K K F F F F F F Dostál 1989 F F F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr s r r r s r s se e r se r r sc s c la e la r r r se r r r r se r r r r sc e r sc r sc r s e e s sc r r r e se sc r r c r s r r 1 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 5 5 1 5 2 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 2 5 2 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 3 1 1 1 5 3 3 5 1 1 3 2 d d d d d d d a d d d d d d d a a a a b a a a d d d d d d d d d a a d ad d a a a a d d d a d a a d ad ad d a a d d d Origin E AS E AS AMC E AS AS AS AU AF E AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN E E E AS E AS E E E AS E E AS E E E Si Ar Ar Cy PT DM Sc Si DM Si VE Al Ap Cm CA Sr Er CE Ge GQ Si Si VE Si VE Si VE Si Cl Oa t s a st s s s a a pe ts st ts ts st b a a a pe a a pe pe pe pe pe pe AS AF a AS a AMS a AMN AMC AF a AMN a E AS a AS ts E pe E pe AS AF pe E a AMN AMC AMS pe E pe AMN pe AMN pe E s AS AF a AMC pe E AS AF a AS a AMN AMC AMS pe AMN a AMN a AS b E AS a E a AS s E pe E pe .: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 149 LH Source F F K F F F Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F. Smejkal 1989a F F F F F F K K K K K K K K K. Petřík 2002 K Dostál 1948-1950.

Digitalis lutea L. Doronicum columnae Ten.) P. Elymus canadensis L. Duchesnea indica (Andrew) Focke Ecballium elaterium (L. Echium vulgare L.) F. Digitalis purpurea L. Echinochloa frumentacea Link Echinochloa muricata (P. pectiniformis Henrard Digitaria sanguinalis (L. Digitaria sanguinalis subsp.) Link Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Scop. Léveille Epilobium ×mentiens Smejkal Epilobium ×novae-civitatis Smejkal Epilobium ×nutantiflorum Smejkal Epilobium ×prochazkae Krahulec Epilobium ×vicinum Smejkal Epimedium alpinum L. B.) DC. Elaeagnus angustifolia L. Elodea nuttallii (Planch. Gray Echinops exaltatus Schrad.) Thell. Doronicum pardalianches L.) St. Dipsacus sativus (L. Martius) Solms-Laub.) DC. Eleusine indica (L. sanguinalis Dinebra retroflexa (Vahl) Panzer Diplotaxis muralis (L. Eichhornia crassipes (C.) Fritsch Echinochloa utilis Ohwi et Yabuno Echinocystis lobata (Michx) Torrey et A.150 Taxon Dianthus chinensis L. Echium plantagineum L. Br. Epilobium ×floridulum Smejkal Epilobium ×fossicola Smejkal Epilobium ×iglaviense Smejkal Epilobium ×interjectum Smejkal Epilobium ×josefi-holubi Krahulec Epilobium komarovianum H. Camus Diervilla lonicera Mill. Digitaria ischaemum (Schreber) Mühlenb. Hubbard Fam Car Gra Cap Scr Scr Scr Gra Gra Gra Gra Bra Bra Dip Com Com Com Bra Lam Lam Ros Cuc Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Cuc Com Com Bor Bor Gra Pont Ela Gra Hydp Hydc Hydc Lam Gra Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ber Gra Gra Stat cas cas cas# cas cas inv nat* nat* nat* cas nat* nat* cas nat# nat# nat# cas cas cas nat cas cas nat cas cas cas cas inv nat inv cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas inv nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas Res neo neo neo neo neo neo ar arM arM neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186.) Honck. Eragrostis albensis H.) Gaertn. Ehrharta longiflora Sw. Epilobium dodonaei Vill. Scholz Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) A. Draba sibirica (Pall. B.) Fernald Echinochloa oryzoides (Ard. Doronicum orientale Hoffm. Richard Echinochloa colonum (L. Digitalis lanata Ehrh. T. John Elsholtzia ciliata Willd. Dracocephalum thymiflorum L. Epilobium ciliatum Rafin.) A. Dichanthium sericeum (R. Echinops sphaerocephalus L. Dracocephalum moldavica L. 2002 1st 1961 1881 1872 1790 Landuse H H SH H SH NS H H H H H SH H S S S H H H H H H NSH H H H H NSH SH SH H NSH H H H H H NSH N H H NSH NSH H SH SH SH SH H SH H SH SH SH H H H Landscape TM M T T T T TM TM TM M T T T T T T M T TM TM M M TM M M M M T TM TM M TM M T TM M TM TM TM TM M TM TM TM T TM TM T TM TM TM TM T T TM M TM 1972 1901 1819 1897 1963 1854 1958 1960 1880 1950 1911 1871 1960 1963 2000 1963 1879 1988 1853 1926 1794 1980 1979 1987 1997 1964 1987 1972 1976 1997 1971 1874 1984 . subsp. Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L. Elodea canadensis Michx. Ellisia nyctelea L.

Smejkal 1986 F. Hendrych 1987 F F. Slavík 1986 F. K. K F F F. Mackeová 1999 K K K K. Smejkal 1995 F. Smejkal 1995 K. Krahulec 1999 F. Štech in prep. Rydlo 2000 K K. Klotz 1963 Dvořák & Kühn 1966 Rydlo 2001 F K. Štech in prep. Hejný et al. Smejkal 1995 F. 1973 F. Holub 1966. Hejný 1950-51. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr r se r r r la sc r c r sc sc r r r s r e e r r e c e r e r la r c se c se r r r r c r r e c la r r s r s r r r r r r r s r 1 1 1 2 2 5 5 4 5 1 5 4 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 4 3 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 3 1 5 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 d a d ad ad d a a d a ad a ad d d d d d a d d a a a a a a d d d a a a d d a ad a d d a a a a a a a a ad a a a a a d a a Origin AS AU AMN E E E E E E AS AF E AF E AS AF E E E AS E AS AS E AS AS E AS AF E E AS AS AMN E AS AMN E E AS E E AS AF AMS E AS AF AMN AMN AMN AS AMN AMN AMC E CE LF Er PS Si MP PS Er Er PS MP Si VE Mn Si CA DM Ar Pa PS Bi Nc Es Si SO Sf Al Ae Ae DM Al CA DM Ab AS Si AF Fv HF MP Er Mp Bf Pp Si Ma Ar Pa CE Ae Al Bi Si DM Sx Se Ae GA ab pe s b pe pe b pe a a a a ab pe b pe pe pe pe a a pe pe a a a a a a a pe pe b b pe a pe t a a pe pe a pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe AU pe pe pe pe pe pe E pe a AS AF AMC AMS a . Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F F F.Pyšek et al. Domin 1948. Smejkal 1995 F. Hejný et al. Husák 1992 F. Pyšek & Mandák 1998b K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F F K. Cejp 1948 K F. Smejkal 1995 K. Smejkal 1995 F. Smejkal 1974 F. Smejkal 1995 F K K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966. Řehořek 1974. Slavík & Lhotská 1967. Dvořák & Kühn 1966. Jehlík 1998 F K. Holub 1978a F. Smejkal 1975b F K K K K K. Sutorý 2000. 1973 K F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 151 LH Source F K. Krahulec 1999 F.

Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall Fritillaria meleagris L. Forsythia suspensa (Thunb. Erigeron annuus subsp. officinalis Fam Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Ran Com Com Com Com Com Gra Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Bra Bra Bra Api Api Bra Bra Bra Bra Lil Pap Bra Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Eup Poly Poly Poly Poly Mor Com Ros Ros Api Ole Ros Ole Ole Lil Fum Fum Stat cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat inv nat cas nat cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat nat cas cas cas nat* cas nat* nat cas nat* cas nat* nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas nat nat* cas cas cas# cas cas cas cas nat inv cas cas nat* Res neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo ar neo neo ar neo arI ar arB neo neo neo neo neo arM neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo arN Preslia 74: 97–186. Filipendula kamtschatica (Pallas) Maxim. Fraxinus ornus L. Euphorbia chamaesyce L. Erodium moschatum (L. Euphorbia humifusa Willd. Schulz Eryngium amethystinum L. Erechtites hieraciifolia (L.) L’Hér. Eragrostis suaveolens Becher. Erysimum argillosum (Greene) Rydberg Erysimum cheiranthoides L. 2002 1st 1966 1961 1961 1965 Landuse H H H H H H NSH NSH H H H H H H NSH H H H H H SH H H S SH H SH NS H SH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H NSH H SH SH H H SH H NS NSH SH H H Landscape M M TM M M M T T TM TM TM TM M M T TM M M TM T T T T T TM T T T TM T TM T T TM TM TM TM TM TM T TM T T M TM TM T T TM M M TM T TM T TM TM 1884 1888 1961 1956 1897 1855 1986 1900 1867 1870 1966 1995 1942 1819 1819 1974 1872 1930 1872 1880 1966 1872 1940 1950 1819 .) L’Hér.) Wagenitz Erigeron annuus (L. Schulz Erucastrum nasturtiifolium (Poiret) O. Erodium botrys (Cav. Euphorbia marginata Pursh. Eragrostis tef (Zuccagni) Trotter Eranthis hyemalis (L.) Link Eragrostis minor Host Eragrostis multicaulis Steud. cheiranthoides Erysimum cheiri (L. subsp. Löve Ficus carica L.) Rafin. subsp. Euphorbia maculata L.) Salisb. Fagopyrum esculentum Moench Fagopyrum tataricum (L. Bieb.) C. Erigeron strigosus Willd. Fumaria capreolata L. Hubb. Erodium cicutarium (L. et Wieg. cicutarium Erodium gruinum (L. subsp.) Gaertn.) O. Euphorbia helioscopia L. Filago gallica L. Eriochloa procera (Retz.) Vahl Fragaria ×magna Thuill. septentrionalis (Fern. Fumaria officinalis L. E. Erythronium dens-canis L. E. Euphorbia lagascae Sprengel Euphorbia lathyris L.152 Taxon Eragrostis gracilis Schrader Eragrostis mexicana (Lag. Fallopia aubertii (L. subsp. Euphorbia peplus L.) Mill. Eryngium giganteum M.) L’Hér. Euphorbia taurinensis All. Erodium neuradifolium Delile Eruca sativa (L.) Crantz Erysimum repandum L. Br. ex DC.) Pers. Erucastrum gallicum (Willd. Filipendula rubra (Hill) Robinson Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Henry) Holub Fallopia convolvulus (L. annuus Erigeron speciosus (Lindl.) Bertol. Euphorbia falcata L. Eschscholzia californica Cham. Euphorbia exigua L.) Á.) DC.) R. E. Euclidium syriacum (L.

Eitel 1982 K F. Vopravil 1950-1951 K K. Slavík 1996b F F F F.Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 153 LH a a a a a a pe pe ab a pe a a ab ab ab ab ab a ab b pe pe pe b pe a pe a pe a a a a a a a a ab a a a a a a s a ts a pe pe pe s pe t t pe a a Source K K K K. Unar 1978 F F F F F. Slavík 1996c F F. Chrtek & Křísa 1970 F F F F F. Smrček & Malina 1984 F F F F F F K F F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr 1 1 5 1 1 1 2 4 5 4 1 3 1 1 5 1 2 1 3 4 3 1 1 1 5 2 4 1 2 2 1 5 4 5 1 1 3 1 2 5 2 3 2 5 5 2 2 1 1 2 1 4 2 4 1 1 5 a a a a a a d a a a d a a a a ad ad a ad a a d d d a d a d d a a a a a a a d ad d a a d d d ad d a d d d d d d d d a a Origin AMS AMN E AS AS E AS AF AS E AMN AMN AMN AMN AMS AMN AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS AF E E E E AMN E AS AF E E E AMN E AS AMN E E AS AF E AS AF AS E E AMN AMN E E AS AS AS AS E AS AS E AS AF AS AMN E AS AS E AS AMN E E E AS e r Er sc e se e Ae Ai r CE At r DM Al CA Ar c Si DM sc se r se e AS Ab PF KP AF Cl DM Oa Si HF Fvc e r e r Si PS SO CA sc Oa DM CA la se se e VE SO Bi Si c r Cl CA Oa r Cr s r r e Cl Sh sc Cl sc VE c MP e e Si VE r e Si r VE Si Cl c DM r r r BS sc Cl Sh Ah Sn VE SO TA c r Th Sn e e e r BS r Si sc r Ai la r r Cl Sh Ah VE sc . Sutorý 1982 F F F F F F. Štěpánek 1983 F F F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Štěpánek 1983 F. Kirschner & Štěpánek 1984 F F F K F F. Kubát 1979 F K. Jehlík 1998 Dostál 1989 K Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F.

) A.) Duby Gaillardia pulchella Foug.) Nyman Fumaria vaillantii Loisel. Gypsophila elegans M. Geranium pusillum Burm. Geranium pyrenaicum Burm. 2002 1st Landuse H H H SH SH SH SH H SH NSH SH SH H H SH S SH SH H H H NS NS NSH H H SH H H H SH H SH H H S SH H S H H NS SH NSH H H SH H H H H H H H H H H Landscape TM T TM TM TM TM T M TM TM T TM TM TM T T T T T M M T T T T TM TM T TM TM T TM TM M TM T TM TM T TM TM T T T M TM T T TM TM TM TM TM M M TM M 1819 1852 1901 1867 1835 1852 1822 1961 1928 1965 1819 1992 1851 1850 1986 1923 1956 1956 1982 1900 1961 1958 1900 1968 1900 1872 1974 1973 . fil.) Blake Galinsoga parviflora Cav.154 Taxon Fumaria officinalis subsp. Grindelia squarrosa (Pursh) Dunal Guizotia abyssinica (L. Geum ×gajewskii Smejkal Geum macrophyllum Willd. subsp. Geranium versicolor L. Dietr. Galium rubioides L. Bieb. fil. fil. Geum ×spurium Fisch.) Merrill Glycyrrhiza glabra L. Hitchc. Rudolph Glaucium flavum Crantz Glyceria striata (Lamk. Galium spurium L.) Desf. Galega officinalis L. Galium parisiense L. Gilia multicaulis Bentham Gilia tricolor Bentham Glaucium corniculatum (L. Geranium molle L. Geum aleppicum Jacq. Helianthus salicifolius A. lutea Geranium columbinum L. Fam Fum Fum Fum Fum Fum Fum Lil Com Fab Lam Lam Lam Com Com Rub Rub Rub Rub Rub Gra Gra Fab Gen Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ger Ros Ros Ros Ros Pole Pole Pole Pap Pap Gra Gra Fab Fab Com Com Car Car Com Com Com Com Com Com Stat nat cas nat* nat* nat* nat* nat* cas nat inv nat* cas inv inv cas cas nat* nat cas cas cas nat nat nat* nat* cas cas# nat nat inv cas cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas nat cas cas nat# cas# cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas Res arN ar ar ar arM arI ar neo neo neo arM neo neo neo neo neo arN arM neo neo neo neo neo arB arN neo neo ar arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Helianthus petiolaris Nutt. Helianthus annuus L. Galium tricornutum Dandy Galium verrucosum Hudson Gastridium ventricosum (Gouan) Schinz et Thell. Helianthus rigidus (Cass. Geranium sibiricum L. Geranium macrorrhizum L. Gypsophila scorzonerifolia Ser. Geranium reflexum L. Fumaria parviflora Lam. et Mey.) J.) P. wirtgenii (Koch) Arcang. Genista sagittalis L.) Cass. B. Helianthus strumosus L. S. Fumaria rostellata Knaf Fumaria schleicheri Soyer-Willemet Fumaria vaillantii subsp. Helianthus ×laetiflorus Pers. schrammii (Aschers. Galeobdolon argentatum Smejkal Galeopsis ladanum L. Glyceria stricta Hook Glycine max (L. Gilia capitata Sims. Geranium ibericum Cav. Geranium rotundifolium L. Geranium dissectum L. Gentiana lutea L. Galeopsis segetum Necker Galinsoga ciliata (Rafin. H. Gaudinia fragilis (L. Bieb. subsp. vaillantii Gagea villosa (M.

Slavík 1997a F. Smejkal 1975a F F K K F. Skalická 1993 F F. Domin 1923.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 155 LH a a a a a a pe a pe pe a a a a a pe a a a a a ss pe ab a pe pe ab ab b pe pe a pe pe pe pe pe pe pe a ab ab b pe pe pe a pe a pe a a pe a pe a pe pe pe Source F F F F F F K K F F. Jehlík 1998 K K K K Syntaxa Cl Sh Ah VE VE VE Cl Sh VE Si GA PS Cl VE Si PS Cl Sh VE Si PS Bd VE BR Ab Sf Pa Ar DM Oa Ai BS TA Ae Sh Sc Cl CE VE PS VE PS Abund LocNo Intr c e sc sc r sc sc r r sc sc r c c e e sc r e se r r r sc sc r r r c c r r r e r e r e s r r r e r se r r r r r r sc sc se r se se 5 2 5 5 3 5 4 1 4 4 4 2 5 5 2 1 5 4 1 1 1 3 1 5 5 1 2 3 5 5 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 5 1 1 1 1 a ad a a a a a d d d a d a a ad a a a ad a a ad d a a d d a a ad d a ad a ad a ad a d d a d a a d d d ad ad d d d d d d d Origin E AS E AS AF E E AS E E AS E AMN E E AS E AMC AMS AMS E AS AF E E AS E AF E AF E AF E E E E AS AF E AS AS E E AS AF E AS E AS E E AS E AS E AMN E AS AMN AS AMN AMN AMN E AS E AMN AU AS E AS AMN AF E AS AS AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN AMN Cl Sh Cl GQ Vc EC Ge Bd Gs DM Sc AF VE Sh SO VE Si VE Si SO Cl Sh Si GA MP Ae Fv Cl AS DM Si Sf Ar Ae . Dančák 2002 Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F K K. Slavík 1997a F. Smejkal 1989a F F. Slavík 1997b F F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K F. Slavík 1997a F F. Slavík 1997a F. Kaplan & Řehořek 1998 F F F F K. Smejkal 1988. Chrtek 1989 F. 1989b F. Grüll & Smejkal 1966 K. Slavík 1997b F.Pyšek et al. Smejkal 1959 F F F F F F K. Slavík 1997b F. Slavík 1997b F.

) L. rhamnoides Hirschfeldia incana (L.) Lagreze-Fossat Hordeum distichon L. Helminthotheca echioides (L. Heliopsis helianthoides (L. Helleborus odorus W. Herniaria hirsuta L. Hosta plantaginea (Lamk.) Stapf Hyssopus officinalis L. oblongipetala (Borbás) Dvořák Hesperis pycnotricha Borbás et Degen Hibiscus trionum L. Helleborus foetidus L.) Ohba Hylotelephium ewersii (Ledeb.) Roth Iris germanica L.) Jacq. Hyparrhenia hirta (L.156 Taxon Helianthus tuberosus L. Ipomoea hederacea (L. matronalis Hesperis matronalis subsp. Hesperis matronalis L.) Ohba Hylotelephium spectabile (Boreau) Ohba Hyoscyamus albus L. Iberis umbellata L.) Sweet Heliotropium europaeum L.) DC. Hordeum secalinum Schreber Hordeum vulgare L.) Holub Hemerocallis fulva (L. Meyer et Lalem. Hemerocallis lilioasphodelus L. 2002 1st 1885 Landuse NSH H H H SH N SH H SH SH NSH H H H SH NSH SH SH H H S S H H H H H H H H H H H H N NSH H H H H H H SH SH H H S H NSH NS S SH H SH H H NSH Landscape TM TM T T T T T TM TM TM TM TM M T T T T T M TM T T M M TM M M M M TM M TM T TM T T T T T T T M T TM TM TM TM TM TM TM T T M T TM TM T 1874 1819 1861 1883 1883 1862 1960 1909 1817 1933 1909 1950 1978 1891 1902 1956 1961 1967 1960 1900 1890 1961 1819 1888 1880 1896 1870 1986 1809 1960 1819 1972 1969 1867 . Impatiens scabrida DC. Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier et Levier Heracleum persicum Desf. ex Schulzer. Hyoscyamus niger L. et K. Humulus scandens (Lour. ex Fischer. subsp. Kanitz et Knapp) Thell. oblongifolia (Schur) Dvořák Hesperis matronalis subsp. Inula helenium L. Impatiens glandulifera Royle Impatiens parviflora DC. Hesperis matronalis subsp.) Aschers. Imperatoria ostruthium L. Koch) Schur Hyacinthella rumelica Velen. Ipomoea purpurea (L. Fam Com Com Bor Ran Ran Ran Ran Com Hem Hem Api Api Car Car Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Mal Com Fab Ela Bra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Aga Can Hya Hya Cra Cra Cra Sol Sol Gra Lam Bra Bra Bra Bal Bal Bal Bal Bal Api Api Com Con Con Lil Stat inv cas nat* cas cas cas# nat cas cas cas inv cas cas nat* cas nat cas cas cas nat cas# cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas nat* cas cas cas# cas cas# cas# cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas# cas cas cas inv inv cas inv* cas nat cas cas nat Res neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo arI neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Hordeum geniculatum All. Hordeum murinum L. Impatiens balsamina L. Iberis sempervirens L. Impatiens balfouri Hooker fil. Hordeum jubatum L.) Lassen Hippophaë rhamnoides L. Herniaria cinerea DC. candida (Kit. subsp. Hieracium pannosum Boissier Hippocrepis emerus (L. Helleborus niger L. Hylotelephium anacampseros (L. Imperatoria verticillaris (L.) Merrill Hyacinthella leucophaea (C. Iberis amara L. Helleborus viridis L. Hordeum leporinum Link Hordeum marinum Huds.

Pyšek et al. Šuk 2001 F F F F F K. Vraštil1952. Daumann 1967. 1994.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 157 LH Source K K F F F Dostál 1948-1950. Pyšek 1991. Slavík 1996a F F. Daumann 1967. Dvořák 1968 F. Dvořák 1968 F F F F F. Jehlík 1998 K K. Šuk 2001 F K K K F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F F F F F F. Pyšek & Prach 1995a.b. 1995a. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K K K K K K F Šuk 2001 Dostál 1989. Dvořák 1968 F. Dvořák 1968 F. Pyšek & Pyšek 1994 F F F F. Slavík 1996a F. Kopecký 1973 F K K F K Syntaxa Al Ae Er VE Oa Abund LocNo Intr c r e r r r sc r r r la s r r sc sc r r s r s e r r r r sc se r c r sc r r s r r r r e sc se sc r r r r r la c e la e sc r r sc 5 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 4 1 5 1 1 3 2 5 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 5 5 1 5 1 4 1 2 4 d d ad d d d d a d d d d a a d d d ad d ad d d d a d a d a a a a d d d d d d d d a a a d d d d d d d d d d a d a d d Origin AMN AMN E AS AF E AF E E E E E E E AS E AS AF E AS AF E E E E E E AS E AS E AS AF E AS E AS AF E E AS AMN E AS E E AS E DM BS BR Ae Ae BS SS Ct Ar MP Al IS BS Ae Pe Er Si Si MP Si Pa Si Si Oa Si Sf St Ae Ph Cr Fg TA CR BS SS IS GA Ae PT Pe Ae Ad Pa Ae CA Fv pe pe a pe pe pe pe pe pe pe b pe b pe a a pe pe pe pe pe b pe a pe s ts ab a a a a a a pe a AS pe AS a E pe E pe E pe AS ss AS pe E AS AF b a pe E AS AF ba E AS pe E ss E a E AS ss E a AS a AS a AS a AS a AS a E pe E pe AS pe AMN AMC AMS a AMC AMS a E pe . Pyšek et al.

tinctoria Ismelia versicolor Cass. Lathyrus tuberosus L.) Chaix Lemna turionifera Landolt Lens culinaris Med. spuria Kochia scoparia subsp.) Dumort. Lagurus ovatus L. Lepidium africanum (Burm. Lathyrus tingitanus L. Isatis tinctoria subsp. Juglans nigra L. Lathyrus odoratus L. densiflora (Moq. Lappula squarrosa (Retz.) Schrader subsp. Iris sambucina L. elatine Kickxia spuria (L. Lamium amplexicaule L. subsp. Iva xanthiifolia Nutt. Lepidium campestre (L. Lathyrus ochrus (L. scoparia f. Lepidium heterophyllum Bentham Lepidium latifolium L. Lamium hybridum Vill.) Delarbre Legousia speculum-veneris (L. Lathyrus clymenum L. Leontopodium alpinum Cass. Lappula patula (Lehm.) R. 2002 1st 1867 1921 Landuse SH SH S NS H H S NSH SH H H H H H H SH H H H H H SH SH H H S H H NSH NSH H NSH H SH H H H H H SH SH H H H H S H NS H H H H H SH NSH H H Landscape TM TM T T TM TM T TM T T T T M M TM T TM TM M T M TM TM TM TM T TM M T T M T TM TM M TM M T TM T TM TM M TM TM TM TM T T T TM T M T TM M TM 1851 1934 1901 1819 1819 1900 1957 1872 1946 1960 1874 1961 1809 1809 1997 1819 1901 1887 1934 1899 1964 1904 1900 . Lathyrus articulatus L. Lamium moluccellifolium Fries Lamium orvala L.-d’Urv.) DC. communis Lathyrus annuus L. fil.) Menyh.) DC. Leonurus villosus Dum.) Aellen Kochia scoparia (L. Fam Lil Lil Bra Bra Com Com Jug Jug Jun Scr Scr Scr Chen Chen Chen Fab Com Com Com Com Gra Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Bor Bor Com Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Lam Mal Mal Cam Cam Lem Fab Com Lam Lam Lam Lam Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Stat cas cas cas nat cas nat cas nat inv cas nat* nat* cas inv cas nat cas nat* cas cas cas nat nat* cas cas cas nat* cas nat* nat* cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas# nat* nat cas nat cas nat* nat cas cas Res neo neo neo ar neo neo neo arP neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo arM neo neo neo arB arI neo ar neo arN neo ar arN neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM neo neo neo neo arR neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Lavatera trimestris L. Lepidium densiflorum Schrad. Leonurus cardiaca L. Juglans regia L. A.) Dumort Lapsana communis L.158 Taxon Iris pallida Lam. Kickxia elatine subsp. Meyer Lactuca virosa L. Lathyrus aphaca L. trichophylla Schinz et Thell Laburnum anagyroides Med. scoparia Kochia scoparia subsp. Lathyrus cicera L.) Dumort. Lawrencia glomerata Hooker Legousia hybrida (L. praecox (Tratt. Lactuca sativa L. Isatis tinctoria L. Lamium album L. Lavandula angustifolia Mill. Lactuca serriola L Lactuca tatarica (L. subsp. Br.) C. Lamium purpureum L. Juncus tenuis Willd. Lathyrus sativus L.) Domin et Podp. subsp. crinita (Mabille) Greuter Kickxia elatine (L. subsp. Leonurus intermedius Holub Leonurus japonicus Houtt.

Jehlík 1998 F F K F F F F. Lhotská & Slavík 1969. Hejný et al.KP Ab DM PF DM Co Sr Al MP CA Si . 1973. 1977 F F F F F F F F F F F. Otruba 1946 F F F F. Jehlík 1998 F. Jehlík 1980. Kaplan 2000 F K F. Hejný et al.Pyšek et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 159 LH pe pe b pe b pe a a t t pe a a a a a a st a a pe a a pe a ? ? pe ab a ab a a a a a a a a a a pe ss a pe a a a pe a pe pe pe pe pe a ab ab pe pe Source K K F F K K. Koš ál 1903 F. Holub 1974 F K F F. Hejný et al. Jehlík 1998 F F K K K. Holub 1993 Holub 1993 F Holub 1993 F F F. 1998 K K F F. Chrtková et al. 1973. 1973 F F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr s r s la r sc r la c se r r sc sc sc la r c r e r c sc r r r c e sc c e r e r e r e r r sc r r se r r s r r sc sc e r se sc la r r 1 2 1 4 1 4 1 5 5 1 4 4 3 5 3 4 4 5 3 1 2 5 5 1 1 1 5 1 5 5 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 1 5 4 2 2 d d a d d a d d a a a a a a d d d a a a d a a a a d a a a a a a a ad a d a d d a d d a d d a d d ad ad a ad a a a a ad Origin E AS E E AF AMN AMN E AS AMN E AS AF E E AS AF AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E AS E E E AS E AS AF E E E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AS E AS E AS AF E AF E AS AF E AS AF E E AS AF E AS AF E AF E AS E E AU E E AS AMN E AS E AS AS E AS AF E AS AMN E E AS DM Fv AF Si BS Cr Qp AQ BR Bd Ar Al NJ Cy Sh Cl Cl Si Si Sr Si Bd Si Si Si Al Al Ae Si Sh Cl VE Ab AS Ae Ai VE Sh Cl Si Oa Si GA IS TA Fv Gs Ar CA Pa Cl Cl CA DM Le Al Ae Al Ae Al Ae Bd Ar. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F K.

Lupinus angustifolius L. . Lupinus luteus L. Meyer) Fisch. Lepidium virginicum L. B. Br. Lunaria annua L. Linaria maroccana Hooker Linaria repens (L.) R. Lindernia dubia (L. Majorana hortensis Moench Malcolmia africana (L. Lonicera tatarica L. Lycium chinense Mill. Lobularia maritima (L.) L. Malus ×dasyphylla Borkh. Malcolmia maritima (L.) Desr.) Pennell Linum usitatissimum L. Lepidium ruderale L. caerulescens (DC. Lythrum junceum Banks et Solander Macleaya cordata (Willd. Lepidium sativum L.) Spach Leucosinapis dissecta (Lag.) A. Br. Gray Leptochloa filiformis (Lamk. Lonicera caprifolium L. Br.) Zelený Levisticum officinale Koch Leymus arenarius (L.) Desf. subsp. Lithospermum arvense L.) Tzvelev Leucosinapis alba (L. et Mey. Linaria vulgaris Mill. Leucanthemella serotina (L. Luzula nivea (Nath. menthifolius (Mabille) Skalický Lysimachia punctata L. A. Lolium multiflorum Lamk. Lychnis chalcedonica L. Lycopus europaeus subsp. Linaria arvensis (L. Malva crispa (L.Mazz. Lobelia erinus L. arvense Lithospermum arvense subsp.) Desv.) P. Lupinus albus L.) Hochst.) R.) R.) DC.160 Taxon Lepidium perfoliatum L. Lepyrodiclis holosteoides (C. Fam Bra Bra Bra Bra Gra Gra Gra Car Com Bra Bra Api Gra Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Lin Bor Bor Cam Bra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Cap Cap Bra Fab Fab Fab Fab Jun Car Car Sol Sol Bor Bor Lam Pri Lyt Pap Com Ber Lam Bra Bra Bra Mal Ros Ros Mal Mal Stat cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat* cas cas nat* cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat cas# nat cas cas cas# inv nat cas nat inv cas# nat* cas cas nat cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas Res neo arR neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar neo ar arN neo neo neo neo neo arI neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar ar neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Lychnis coronaria (L. Malva ×adulterina Wallr. Lycium barbarum L. Malcolmia chia (L. Lolium remotum Schrank Lolium rigidum Gaudin Lolium temulentum L. Lupinus polyphyllus Lindl.) Hand.) DC. Lycopsis arvensis L. Malus domestica Borkh.) Rothm. Leptochloa chinensis Nees Leptochloa fascicularis (Lamk. 2002 1st 1872 1874 1936 Landuse H H H H H H H H N H H H N H H NSH SH S H SH H H H H H H H H NSH SH NSH H SH SH NS SH H NS NSH H H H H SH H H H NSH H H H H H NS NSH H H Landscape TM TM TM TM M M M T T TM M T T T TM TM TM T TM T T TM M M TM T TM T T TM TM M TM T T T TM T TM T T TM T TM M TM M TM TM M M M TM T TM T TM 1961 1967 1875 1953 1809 1934 1989 1867 1963 1883 1809 1872 1819 1878 1900 1880 1895 1879 1870 1911 1880 1819 1965 1935 1850 1969 1853 . Madia sativa Molina Mahonia aquifolium (Pursh) Nutt. Lycopsis orientalis L. Lolium loliaceum (Bory et Chaub. Malope trifida Cav.) Mill.

2001 F F F F. Skalický 1968 F F. Toman & Starý 1966 F K F F F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 161 LH a ab a ab a a a a pe a a pe pe a a pe pe a ab a a a pe a a pe a a a s s b a a a pe pe pe pe b s s ab ab pe pe pe pe a s ab a a a a t ts ? a Source F F F F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K F F F F F F F K F F F F F F. Kurka 1990 F F F F F K K K K. Suda 1999. Krist 1940 F F F F F F F Syntaxa Si DM MP DM Si MP Abund LocNo Intr r c r sc r r r r e sc e r r r r r c s sc sc se r r s c e r e sc r sc r r e c r r r sc s sc r se c se r r la r e e r r sc sc r r 3 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 2 5 1 5 5 1 2 2 1 5 3 1 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 5 1 2 4 5 1 5 1 1 4 1 1 1 5 2 1 1 1 2 4 5 2 4 ad a d ad a a a a a ad a d d a a ad a a d a a d d a d a a a d d d ad ad d d d d ad d d a a a d a d a d d a d d d a d a d Origin E E AS AF AMN AMC AS AMN AMS AMC AMS AS E AS E AS E AS E E AF AF E E AS AMN E AS E AS E AS AF E E AS E E AS E E AS E E E E AMN E E AS E AS AF E AS AS E E AS E E E AS AMC AMN E E AS AF E E E AF Si VE Ae Ad Ah SO Sc DM DM CA Si Cl Sh VE AS Cl Pa Ar Ah Ah Cr Bd CR TA Ae GA Si CE Ar Fv Bd Qt Ar BS BR SO PS Ae Ap Ar Ct PT CE Bd Qt CR Bd Cr PR Bd BS SS Mn MP Si Al AS .Pyšek et al. Hejný et al. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F K F F F K F. 1973 K K K. Krahulec 1981 F.

Matthiola incana (L. Mentha spicata L. Medicago sativa L. Malva ×zoernigii Fleischer Mantisalca salmantica (L. Mimulus guttatus DC. Melilotus indicus (L.) Bartal. Monolepis nuttaliana (Schult. Matricaria discoidea DC. Medicago lupulina L. subsp. Melilotus messanensis (L.) All. subsp. Ball Matthiola longipetala (Vent. Melilotus wolgicus Poiret Melissa officinalis L. Melilotus officinalis (L. barbatum Melica altissima L.) R. Mirabilis jalapa L. J.) Hill subsp. Medicago orbicularis (L. Matteucia struthiopteris (L. Fam Mal Mal Mal Mal Mal Mal Com Lam Lam Lam Com Dry Bra Bra Bra Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Scr Scr Gra Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Eup Ros Scr Scr Scr Scr Nyc Gra Scr Chen Bra Bor Bor Bor Api Stat nat* cas nat* nat* cas cas cas cas nat* nat* inv nat cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat nat* nat* cas nat inv cas cas inv cas cas cas nat* cas nat cas cas nat* nat nat nat nat* cas cas nat* inv* nat cas cas nat* cas cas nat* cas cas inv* Res arI neo arN ar neo ar neo ar ar arM neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar neo neo arM neo neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo ar arB ar neo ar neo neo neo neo ar neo neo arB ar ar neo Preslia 74: 97–186. longipetala Medicago arabica (L.) Fourr. W. Br. piperita Mentha ×rotundifolia (L. incana Matthiola longipetala subsp. Medicago polymorpha L. Mercurialis annua L. Melilotus albus Med.) Scop. Mespilus germanica L. Marrubium ×paniculatum Desr. Melampyrum barbatum Willd. Medicago rigidula (L.) DC. subsp. Mentha ×piperita L. s.) Speta Microrrhinum minus (L.162 Taxon Malva neglecta Wallr. Microrrhinum litorale (Willd. nothosubsp. subsp.) Rafin. Malva verticillata L. bicornis (Sibth. officinalis Mentha arvensis L.) Pallas Melilotus sulcatus Desf. spicata Mentha spicata L. Andersson Misopates orontium (L. Malva pusilla Sm.) Briq. Malva sylvestris L.) Desr.) Greene Myagrum perfoliatum L.) All. sativa Medicago ×varia Martyn Melampyrum arvense L. Miscanthus sinensis N. et Sm. Malva parviflora L. Mentha ×verticilata L.l.) P.) Huds. 2002 1st 1957 Landuse H H H H H H H H SH H H NSH H H H H H SH H H SH SH NSH NS SH SH SH H H SH H H H SH SH H SH H SH SH SH NSH H NS H NSH NS NS H SH H H H SH N H NS Landscape T TM T T TM T TM T T T TM T TM TM M M M TM M M T TM T T T T TM M M TM M M TM TM TM TM T TM TM TM TM T TM T M T T T M T T M TM TM T T T 1851 1820 1877 1952 1924 1936 1963 1880 1923 1819 1893 1955 1913 1929 1929 1963 1872 1855 1976 1840 1846 1818 1844 1994 1853 1868 1927 1855 1809 . Mimulus moschatus Lindl.) Hudson Medicago disciformis DC. subsp. Marrubium peregrinum L. arvensis Myosotis ×krajinae Domin Myosotis ×pseudohispida Domin Myrrhis odorata (L. Marrubium vulgare L. subsp. Myosotis arvensis (L.) Tod. Mentha ×dalmatica Tausch Mentha ×gracilis Sole Mentha ×niliaca Jacq.

Pyšek 1997 F F F F F F F F. Štěpánek 1998 F. Štěpánek 1998 F. Sutorý 1982 F F F F. Lhotská 1975 Syntaxa Mn MP Oa Mn MP Oa Si Oa Al Si DM Abund LocNo Intr c e sc sc r e r r r r c r r r e r e c e r e c sc sc e r c r e c e e r c sc sc r sc c r r c c r r sc sc r r r r e r c s r la 5 1 5 4 3 1 1 1 4 4 5 3 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 5 5 5 1 1 5 2 1 5 1 1 3 5 4 4 2 3 5 3 3 5 5 3 1 5 5 3 2 1 4 1 2 5 1 2 5 ad a ad d d a a a a ad a d d d a a a ad a a a d ad a a d ad a a ad a a d a ad d d d d d? d a a d a a d d d d a a a a a a d Origin AS E AS AS E AS AS Oa CA Al Oa CA Al Oa Mn Al MP Ai An IS Ae MP Si CA Cl VE Cy Ar DM DM CA Br Ar Br CA Gs Tm Br Ar KP Cl Sh Fv Ar DM Si Al CA DM Si Al CA Ae BS Ah Sh VE SO Pa Ae Ae Pa Ae Pa Pa Ae Ar Pe Al Pa Pa Ap Pa SG Pr Ph VE GQ Bd DM Sc Sr DM SG CM Ct SG CM Pa Ct Si VE Cl Sh Cl Sh Ah PS Si Sr SO Ab Ae PT CE b pe a a b pe a b pe ? E pe pe E pe E pe AS a E AS AMN f E ab E AS a E AS a E AF a E a E AS AF a pe E AS a E a E a AS pe AS pe E AS ap E ap E AS pe E AS ba E AS a E a E AS b E a E b E AS pe E AS pe pe E pe pe E pe pe E pe E pe pe E AF a E AS ts E a E AS AF a AMN pe AMN pe AMN AMC AMS pe AS pe E AS AF a AMN AS a E AS a E AS AF a a a E pe . Štěpánek 1998 F. Štěpánek 1998 F. Hendrych 1984 F F F F F F F F F F F F F K. Štěpánek 1998 F. Mikoláš 1997 F F F F K F F F. Štěpánek 1998 F.Pyšek et al. Štěpánek 1998 F. Štěpánek 1998 F F F. Štěpánek 1998 F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 163 LH Source F F F F F F K F F F K F.

) Fischer Ocimum basilicum L.) DC. Nigella damascena L. Rostański Oenothera flava subsp. Ornithopus compressus L. Oenothera ×punctulata Rostański et Gutte Oenothera pycnocarpa Atkinson et Bartlett Oenothera rubricaulis Klebahn Oenothera stricta Ledeb. Oenothera acutifolia Rostański Oenothera ×albipercurva Renner Oenothera ammophila Focke Oenothera biennis L. Nicotiana tabacum L. Ornithogalum nutans L. Micheli Oenothera hoelscheri Rostański Oenothera issleri Rostański Oenothera missouriensis Sims Oenothera moravica Jehlík et Rostański Oenothera oakesiana S. Orobanche minor Sm. et Arnott Nepeta cataria L. Narcissus pseudonarcissus L. Nonea rosea (M. Nicotiana alata Link et Otto Nicotiana rustica L. Br. Neslia paniculata (L. paniculata Nicandra physalodes (L. Nepeta racemosa Lam. subsp. Orobanche nana (Reuter) Beck Fam Api Hya Amr Hydp Lam Lam Lam Lam Bra Sol Sol Sol Sol Ran Ran Ran Bor Bor Chen Lam Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Ona Bor Fab Com Com Cac Lil Fab Fab Oro Oro Oro Oro Oro Oro Stat cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas nat nat cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat nat cas cas cas cas cas nat* nat* cas cas# nat cas cas cas nat nat# nat# inv cas Res neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo arR neo neo neo neo arR neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Onopordum acanthium L. Ornithopus sativus Brot. Nepeta ×faasenii Stearn Nepeta grandiflora M. 2002 1st 1997 1867 1867 Landuse H H H S H NSH H NSH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H SH H H SH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H SH NS H H S SH H SH H S H H H H Landscape M TM TM TM T T TM T T M M TM TM T TM TM TM TM M TM M M M TM M M TM M TM M M M M M M M M M M T M TM M T T T TM T T M T T T TM TM T T 1900 1853 1891 1891 1874 1872 1939 1975 1899 1848 1831 1953 2001 1936 1961 2000 1890 1975 1949 1913 1985 1962 1914 1972 1960 1914 1825 1967 1884 1973 1852 1906 1809 1937 1889 1896 1878 1945 1985 . Nigella arvensis L. L. Oenothera canovirens Steele Oenothera coronifera Renner Oenothera depressa Greene Oenothera fallax Renner emend. subsp.) Desv. Onopordum ×beckianum John Opuntia phaeacantha Engelm. Oenothera subterminalis Gates Oenothera tetragona Roth Oenothera victorini Gates et Catcheside Omphalodes verna Moench Onobrychis viciifolia Scop. taraxacoides (Woot. Orobanche hederae Duby Orobanche lucorum A. et Standl) W. Bieb. sativus Orobanche crenata Forska ˚l Orobanche gracilis Sm. Nigella sativa L.) Link Obione sibirica (L. Wagner Oenothera glazioviana M.) Gaertn.) Cannon Narcissus poeticus L. Bieb. Nonea lutea (Desr.164 Taxon Myrrhoides nodosa (L. Nemophila menziesii Hooker fil. Watson et Coulter Oenothera parviflora L.

Holub 1991 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F. Roubal 1968 F F F F F F K Sutorý 2001 K K F F F F F F F.Pyšek et al. Procházka 2002 F F F F F F F F F F. Filippov 1999 K K K F F F. Jehlík 1998 F Syntaxa Ar Ae Ar Ae Al Oa Si Abund LocNo Intr s r r r sc r r r c r r r r sc r r r r e r r r r c r s r sc s sc r r r r e r s r sc e r e r r sc la se r r e r e e r s r e 1 4 4 1 5 2 2 2 5 2 1 1 1 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 1 3 3 1 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 2 2 5 5 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 a d d d ad d d d a d d d d a d d d a a d a a ad ad a a a a d d a a d a a ad a a a a a ad a d d a a d d a ad ad a d d a ad Origin E AS E E AMN E AS E E AS AS AMS AMS AMN AMS E AS AF E AS AS E AS AS Cl Sh Ah VE Si Cl Oa DM DM DM DM DM DM DM DM AMN AMN DM DM AMS AMN E E AS E Br Fv Ar Oa Ae An CR Sh Ah Ar E E AS AF E E E E AS E E AS AF E . Chrtek & Skočdopolová 2001a.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 165 LH a pe pe a pe pe pe pe a a a a a a a a a a a a b b b ba b b b b pe b b b pe b b b b ab b ab b pe b pe pe b b pe pe a a b pe p b pe p b pe p b pe p b pe p a b pe p Source K. Jehlík & Rostański 1980 F F F. Roubal 1972 K. Kropáč 1997.

Parietaria pennsylvanica Willd. mesatlanticum (Maire) Kadereit Papaver croceum Ledeb. Paulownia tomentosa (Thunb. ruderale (Kitagawa) Tzvelev Panicum obtusum Humboldt. Phalaris coerulescens Desf.) Tausch ex L. 2002 1st 1852 1963 1852 1963 1961 1843 1968 1940 1961 1970 1975 1823 1961 Landuse H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H SH H H SH H H H H H H SH H NSH H NSH NSH SH SH H N H H H SH SH H H S H H H SH H H H H H H Landscape T TM M TM TM M M TM TM TM M M M M TM T M M M T M TM T TM T TM TM TM M T TM T M TM TM TM TM M T TM TM M T TM TM M T TM TM TM T TM TM M TM TM TM 2001 1865 1882 2000 1900 1993 1989 1968 1837 1891 1961 1867 1961 1961 . Papaver somniferum L.) M. Panicum capillare subsp.) Planchon Pastinaca sativa L. Papaver argemone L. Oxybaphus nyctagineus (Michx) Sweet Paeonia officinalis L. subsp. subsp. Gross Petasites japonicus (Sieb.) Steudel Peltaria alliacea Jacq. Oxalis repens Thunb. Oxalis corniculata L. subsp. H. sativa Pastinaca sativa subsp.) C. Parthenocissus inserta (Kerner) Fritsch Parthenocissus quinquefolia (L. barbipulvinatum (Nash) Tzvelev Panicum capillare L.) A. Phaseolus coccineus L. et Zucc. miliaceum Panicum miliaceum subsp. somniferum Parapholis strigosa (Dum. W. Gray Phacelia ciliata A. Bonpland et Kunth Panicum oligosanthes Schult. ex Meisner) H. Panicum miliaceum subsp.) F. Hubbard Parentucellia viscosa (L. picta L. Bailey Persicaria orientalis (L. Phalaris brachystachys Link Phalaris canariensis L. E. Hill Petunia ×atkinsiana Loudon Peucedanum austriacum (Jacq. agricolum H. Oxalis debilis Humboldt. Phalaris paradoxa L. Scholz et Mikoláš Panicum miliaceum L.166 Taxon Orobanche ramosa L. Oxalis fontana Bunge Oxalis latifolia Humboldt. Pentaglottis sempervirens (L. Parietaria officinalis L.W. Papaver atlanticum subsp. Papaver hybridum L.) Spach Persicaria pennsylvanica (L. Schmidt Petroselinum crispum (Mill. Phalaris minor Retz. urens (Godron) Čelak. Papaver lecoqii Lamotte Papaver pseudo-orientale (Fedde) Medvedev Papaver rhoeas L. subsp.) Caruel Parietaria judaica L. Bonpland et Kunth Oxalis pes-caprae L.) Koch Phacelia campanularia A. Papaver dubium L. Fam Oro Oxa Oxa Oxa Oxa Oxa Oxa Oxa Nyc Pae Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Pap Pap Pap Pap Pap Pap Pap Pap Pap Gra Scr Urt Urt Urt Vit Vit Api Api Scr Bra Bor Poly Poly Poly Com Api Sol Api Hydp Hydp Hydp Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Fab Stat nat* nat cas nat nat cas cas cas nat cas cas nat cas cas cas cas nat cas cas nat* cas cas nat* cas nat cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat* cas inv nat nat* nat cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas Res arI neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo arN neo neo arM neo ar neo arN ar neo neo neo ar neo neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Bonpland et Kunth Oxalis dillenii Jacq. Gray Phacelia tanacetifolia Bentham Phalaris arundinacea var. capillare Panicum compressum Bivona Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx. Gómez Persicaria polystachya (Wall.

Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Jehlík 1998 K K.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 167 LH a b pe p a b pe pe a b pe a b pe pe pe a b pe pe pe a a a a a a a pe pe a pe pe a a a pe a a a ap a pe pe a s s b pe b pe t pe pe a a pe pe b a pe a a a pe a a pe a a pe Source F. Holub & Holubičková 1980. 1998 Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F F. Zlámalík 1996. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Jehlík 1995. 1998 F F F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F Syntaxa Er PS SO VE VE PS SO SO CE Ae Cr Ai Sa VE MP VE Oa Ar Abund LocNo Intr e r s r sc r r r r r r sc se sc sc r sc se r c r r sc e r r c sc r e e sc r la sc c sc r s s r r sc r sc r e r r r sc se sc r se se s 3 4 1 2 5 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 1 5 4 1 1 1 3 1 5 3 5 4 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 4 1 1 1 4 5 2 2 2 2 2 1 a a a a a a a ad ad d a a a a a d a a a a d d a a a d a d a a a ad a d d ad a d a d d a d d d d a d d d d a a a a a d Origin E AS AF E AS AU AF AMS AMN AMN AMC AMS AF AS AU AMN AMC E AS AMN AMN E AMN E AS AS AMC AMS AMC AMS E AF AS E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AS AF E AS E E E E AMN AMN AMN AS AS AS E E AS AMN AS AS E AS AMS E AMN AMN AMN E AS E E E AS AF E AS AF AMC AMS Pa Si PS Er Si Si PS Ah Cl Sh Fv Ab SO Ah Si Cl Sh AS Cl Sh Ah Si Si TA Ai BS IS GA Al Si Ai BS CR Ae BS Ae Ar DM Ar DM Ae Si Si Ah Sh Si Ae Al Ar . Jehlík 1998 F K. Jehlík 1998 K. Jehlík 1998 F F. Jehlík 1998 K. Holub 1996 F K F K F F F F F F K K. Jehlík 1998 Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. Jehlík 1998 K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K F F F F F F F F K F F F K F F F F F K.Pyšek et al. Jehlík 1995. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K K. Mandák 1995 F.

Physalis pubescens L. Prunus persica (L. Pistia stratiotes L. et Gr. Phlox drummondii Hooker Phlox paniculata L. Plantago alpina L.) Franco Polycarpon tetraphyllum (L. oleracea Potentilla fruticosa L. Platycladus orientalis (L. Polygonum aviculare L.) Soják Primula vulgaris Huds. Prunus cerasifera Ehrh.) Desf. Phytolacca americana L. Populus balsamifera L. alkekengi Physalis alkekengi var. subsp. Beck Prunus ×fruticans Weihe Prunus insititia L. F. Potentilla intermedia L. Plantago afra L. Populus ×canadensis Moench Portulaca grandiflora Hooker Portulaca oleracea L. coronopus Plantago gentianoides Sibth.168 Taxon Phaseolus vulgaris L. Fam Fab Phi Gra Gra Pole Pole Pole Gra Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Ros Phy Phy Api Pin Pin Ara Fab Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Plan Plat Cup Car Chen Chen Chen Lil Poly Gra Gra Sal Sal Por Por Ros Ros Ros Pri Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Stat cas cas# cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas cas inv cas nat cas nat inv cas cas cas cas# cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas nat* nat* nat* nat nat* cas cas cas inv cas nat* cas# nat cas nat cas nat nat* nat* nat* nat nat* cas cas inv Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo ar arch arch neo neo neo ar ar ar neo ar neo neo neo neo neo arR neo neo neo neo ar neo ar ar ar ar ar neo ar neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Phleum subulatum (Savi) A. Polypogon fugax Nees ex Steud. paradoxa (Nutt. Pisum sativum L. Prunus cerasus L. Phleum paniculatum Huds. subsp. 2002 1st 1819 Landuse H SH H H H H H H NSH SH H H H H NSH NSH H H NS N N H H N H H H SH SH H N H NSH NS NSH H H H H H SH H H S H SH SH H SH NSH SH NS S SH H H NS Landscape TM TM M M M TM M M TM TM TM TM TM T T T M T T T TM TM TM T M TM TM T T M T M T T T M TM M M M TM M TM T M T T TM T T T T T T M TM TM 1880 1961 1972 1935 2001 1874 1853 1956 1800 1851 1934 1935 1950 1863 1809 1964 1961 1880 1937 1977 1903 2001 . Phlox subulata L. Philadelphus coronarius L.. Polypogon monspeliensis (L.) Maxim. Plantago major L. Braun Polygonatum latifolium (Jacq. Láng Polycnemum majus A. Prunus ×eminens G. Physalis alkekengi L.) Batsch Prunus serotina Ehrh. subsp.) L. Physocarpus opulifolius (L. vulgaris Prunus armeniaca L. Physalis peruviana L. var. Polycnemum heuffelii A. Polycnemum arvense L. Plantago coronopus L. franchetii (Masters) Makino Physalis angulata L.) Desf. Prunus laurocerasus L. Pinus nigra Arnold Pinus strobus L. Pholiurus incurvus Schinz et Thell. Phytolacca esculenta Van Houtte Pimpinella anisum L. Prunus domestica L. et Sm. major Plantago ×mixta Domin Plantago ×moravica Chrtek Platanus ×hispanica Mill. subsp. Potentilla supina subsp. Physalis philadelphica Lam.

Petřík 2001 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr r r r r r r r se sc r se r r s la r r r sc la e r se e e e c e r r r r r e r r c se r r la r sc s r e r r sc sc sc sc r sc r r la 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 3 2 5 5 1 4 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 4 1 5 1 1 1 4 1 5 1 3 1 2 3 5 5 4 4 4 5 1 3 4 d d a a d d d a d d d d d d d d d d d d d d a d a d a a a d d a a a a d a a a d ad d a d a a a d d d d a a d d d d Origin AMS E E E AMN AMN AMN E AS E AS AMN AMC AMS AMS AMC AMN AMC AMS AMN AMN AS AS E AMN AS AF AMC AMS E AS E AS E E E E AS AF CR BS Ai Ae Ai Ar Ae Al Br Fv Qp Cr DS GQ Le Si Na NA MP Sg Si Cy MP Co PF Ah Sn Ab Cl AS Fv Ah Si Cl DM VE SO Si AS E E AS E E AS E E AS E AS AF E AS AF AMN AMS AS AF AS E AMN AS E AS AF AS E AS E AS SS St DM Si VE Er PS MP DM MP Bi Pa BS Bd PR PR Bd BS CR BS Bd PR Ps Gs Bd Bd Ai BS BS Bd PR GQ SS AS E AS AS AMN . Hendrych 1989 F F F F. Chrtek & Skočdopolová 1995 F F F F F F F F F F F. Domin 1937a.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 169 LH a s a pe a a pe pe a pe pe a pe a a s pe pe a t t pe a a pe a pe pe pe pe pe t st a a a a pe a a a t t a a s b pe a pe pe ts ts ts ts s s ts s ts ts Source F F K K F F F Dvořák & Kühn 1966 F. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K F F. Skalický 1972 F F F K F F F.Pyšek et al. Pyšek 1995 F F F F. Novák 2001 K F K.

Pulsatilla vulgaris Mill. Rubus allegheniensis Porter Rubus armeniacus Focke Rubus canadensis L.) Sudw. friesianus (Jordan) Rouy et Fouc. Rostraria cristata (L. Rheum rhabarbarum L. Fam Ros Scr Scr Pin Gra Bor Ran Ran Hya Com Ros Ros Ros Fag Ran Ran Bra Bra Bra Bra Res Res Res Res Res Poly Poly Poly Poly Com Poly Ana Ana Gro Gro Gro Gro Eup Fab Sax Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Gra Rub Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Stat cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat# nat# nat nat nat nat inv cas nat* nat* cas cas cas cas nat nat* cas nat* inv cas inv inv cas cas inv cas cas nat nat* cas cas inv cas cas# cas# cas cas nat# cas cas cas nat nat nat cas nat nat cas nat Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar ar neo neo arB arN ar neo neo neo arR arN neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. Rubus illecebrosus Focke Rubus laciniatus Willd. rugosum Reseda alba L. Ribes spicatum Robson Ricinus communis L. sativus Rapistrum rugosum subsp. var. Rosa rugosa Thunb. incanum Pseudolysimachion ×neglectum (Vahl) Trávníček Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirbel) Franco Puccinellia gigantea (Grossh. lutea Reseda luteola L. Rapistrum rugosum (L.) Arcang. Rosa villosa L. compacta Moldenke Reynoutria japonica Houtt. Rubus moschus Juz. Rhus toxicodendron L. orientale (L. Pseudolysimachion incanum (L.170 Taxon Prunus virginiana L.) Willd. Ribes rubrum L. Robinia pseudacacia L. Quercus rubra L. Rhus hirta (L. 2002 1st Landuse S H N N H SH NS N NS SH NS NSH NS N H H H H H H H SH SH H NSH NSH SH SH SH H H SH H NSH SH NSH NSH H NSH S H H NS SH SH SH H H NSH H SH SH NSH SH S NS Landscape T TM T T M T T T T T T TM T TM TM T TM TM T T TM T T T T TM TM TM TM M TM T TM T T T T TM TM T T T T TM TM TM M M T TM TM TM TM TM T T 1940 1852 1856 1882 1940 1850 1840 1900 1942 1995 1892 1869 1929 1967 1900 1874 1900 1809 1885 1996 1874 2001 1874 1814 1874 1950 1800 1997 1880 . Rodgersia aesculifolia Batalin Rosa ×alba L. subsp.) Holub subsp.) Gaertn. subsp. japonica Reynoutria sachalinensis (F. Rubus odoratus L. Reynoutria ×bohemica Chrtek et Chrtková Reynoutria japonica var. Ranunculus arvensis L. Raphanus sativus L.) Grossh. Rubus occidentalis L. Pulsatilla slavica Reuss Puschkinia scilloides Adams Pyrethrum macrophyllum (W. alba Reseda lutea L. Pyrus ×amphigenea Domin ex Dostálek Pyrus communis L. Rosa ×centifolia L. Pulmonaria sibirica L. Reseda phyteuma L.) Tzvelev Rubia tinctorum L. Ribes aureum Pursh Ribes odoratum Wendl. Herrmann Rosa glauca Pourr. fil. subsp. Ranunculus acris subsp. subsp. Pyrus ×nivalis Jacq. Rosa foetida J. Schmidt) Nakai Rhagadiolus stellatus (L.) All. Reseda odorata L. Raphanus raphanistrum L. et K.

: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 171 LH ts pe pe t a pe pe pe pe pe pe t t t t pe a a ab ab ab a pe a b b a ab pe pe pe pe a pe st s s s s s a ss s t ts pe s s s s s s a pe s s s ss s s s s Source F F. Mandák & Pyšek 1997 F. Mandák & Pyšek 1997. Žíla & Chán 2001 F F F F F Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr s r se r r r r s r r sc sc e sc r sc c r r r r sc sc r r c r c la e r la r r sc sc r r c s r r r r r r r r r r r s r s s sc 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 2 4 5 2 5 1 5 5 2 2 3 1 5 5 2 1 5 1 5 4 1 2 3 1 1 3 5 1 1 5 1 3 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 d d d d a d d d d d ad d d d a a a d a a d a ad d a ad d d d a d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d a d d d d d d d d d Origin AMN E AS AMN AS AS E E AS E AS E AS AMN E E AS AF E AS E AS E AS E AS E E AS E E AS AS AS E AS AS AMN AMN AMN AMN E E AF AMN AS AS E AS E AS E E E AS AMN E AMN AS E AS AMN AMN Cr GQ LF Fv HS Ar Ae GA Bd Bd BS Bd GQ LF Cr Ar Cy Cl Ah Sh SO Si Si Cl Al Si Cl Al Oa DM CA Br Oa Al Cl Sf Ae BS Sf Ae BS Sf Ae BS Ai BS BS TA CR BR GQ Bd PR Al PR BS CE GQ Cr CE .Pyšek et al. Hejný et al. 1994. Trávníček 1998 F F K F F F. Beerling et al. Mandák & Pyšek 1997 K. 1973 F F F F F. Hendrych 1978 F. Roubal 1984. Beerling et al. 1996. Sukopp & Sukopp 1995 K F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F K F F F F. Mandák & Pyšek 1997 F. Hlaváček et al. Šuk 2001 K K F F F F F F F F F F.1994.

Hermann Sagittaria latifolia Willd. Rudbeckia laciniata L. Salsola collina Pallas Salvia officinalis L. hostii Saxifraga hypnoides L. Rubus sylvaticus Weihe et Nees Rubus tuberculatus Bab. subsp. Saxifraga cymbalaria L. patientia Rumex ×propinquus Aresch Rumex scutatus L. fil. Saxifraga ×geum L. Sambucus ebulus L. polygama (W. thyrsiflorus Fingerh. Sanguisorba minor subsp. Satureja hortensis L. Rumex thyrsiflorus Fingerh. 2002 1st Landuse NSH H S H SH S H NSH SH SH H SH SH H SH SH S H H H NSH NSH H NSH S SH N N N H SH H SH H H H H SH NSH H NSH NSH H H H NSH N N S H H SH H NSH H H Landscape TM TM TM TM TM T TM TM T T M T TM M T T T M M T T T M TM T T M T T M TM TM TM M TM M TM T TM TM T TM TM T T T T T T T T T T T M T 1962 1873 1859 1819 1965 1981 1965 1965 1981 1961 1980 1861 1984 1818 1943 1874 2001 1880 1934 1809 1966 1965 1908 1840 1946 1906 1955 1850 1819 1956 1809 1867 1963 .) P. subsp. Scleranthus annuus L. Salix acutifolia Willd. Rumex alpinus L. Saxifraga hostii Tausch subsp. apetala Sagina apetala subsp. Rubus ulmifolius Schott Rubus xanthocarpus Bureau et Franchet Rudbeckia hirta L. hortensis (Mill. ex Link Saponaria ocymoides L. Scirpus pendulus Mühlenb. Rumex brownii Campd.) F. fil. Scandix pecten-veneris L. Salvia sclarea L. B. Mueller) Ulbrich Sclerochloa dura (L. × R. Rumex triangulivalvis (Danser) Rech. Salvia verbenaca L. Fam Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Com Com Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Poly Rut Car Car Alis Sal Sal Chen Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Lam Cap Ros Ros Car Car Lam Sax Sax Sax Sax Sax Sax Api Hya Hya Hya Cyp Car Chen Gra Stat nat cas nat nat cas nat nat inv cas inv cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas nat cas nat inv nat cas nat* nat* cas cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* nat cas cas nat* cas cas cas nat nat cas cas nat* cas cas nat cas nat* cas nat* Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo arP neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo arN neo ar Preslia 74: 97–186. Ruta graveolens subsp. erecta (Hornem. Scilla luciliae (Boiss. Salvia viridis L. Scleroblitum atriplicinum (F. subsp.) Speta Scilla sibirica Haw. Salvia reflexa Hornem. Rumex ×mezei Haussknecht Rumex obovatus Danser Rumex patientia L. Rumex ×corconticus Kubát Rumex confertus Willd. Saxifraga rotundifolia L. Salvia spinosa L. Saponaria officinalis L.172 Taxon Rubus parviflorus Nutt. pecten-veneris Scilla amoena L. Rumex acetosa L. Rumex dentatus subsp. Saxifraga cuneifolia L.) Holub Sanguisorba tenuifolia Fisch.) Gams Sagina apetala Ard.) Rech. Salvia splendens Ker-Gawl. Salix ×sepulcralis Simk. Rumex ×hybridus Kindberg Rumex longifolius DC. et K. halacsyi (Rech. Rubus phoenicolasius Maxim.

Holub 1978b F F. Příhoda 2001 K K K Dostál 1989 F F K. Hendrych 2001 F F. Procházka et al. Kubát 1985 F F F. Holub & Palek 1981 K K. Jehlík & Kopecký 1967 F F. Chrtek & Žáková 1990 Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr s r s s s s sc c r la se e r e r la e e sc r e la r r e e e s r r r e r se r e r sc r e r sc r r r sc s e e r r r sc se c e r 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 4 5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 3 5 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 1 2 5 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 3 3 1 5 1 5 d d d a d d d d a d a a a a a a a a ad a d a a d a a d d d a d a d a d a d a a d d d d d d d d a d a d d d a a a a Origin AMN AS E E E AF AS AMN AMN E AS AU E AS E AS AF E AMS E AS E AS AF E AS AMN E E E AMN E AS AS E AS AMN E AS E AS AF AMS E E AS E AS E AS AS E E AS E AS E E E E E E AS E AS AF E AS E AS AMN E AS AU E AS PR Ae Sf St Ar Ra Ae Pe PT CE Ad Ar Al DM PT Ar Ae Ae Al Ar PT Pe Al DM DM Ar PF CA Si Al DM Gs Fv Th Th MP Ah Sg Ph St Al Ae Fv Br CA DM DM CA PF Ar Si DS Cl Ar Ar Ah Sn Ab Co Sr PS SO MP . Hejný 1949. Hejný et al.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 173 LH s s s s s pe abp pe pe pe pe pe pe a pe pe pe a pe pe pe pe pe ss a a pe t s a ss a b pe pe a pe a pe pe pe pe pe ab pe ab pe pe pe pe a pe pe pe pe a a a Source F F F F F F. 1968. Štěpánková 1999 F F F F F. 1983 F F F F F. Francírková 2001 F F. Kubínová & Krahulec 1997. 1999 F.Pyšek et al. Kubát 1985 F F. Kubát 1985 F. Chrtek et al. Kubát 1985 F. Jehlík 1998 F F F K F F F F F F F. Domin 1924. 1973. Jehlík 1998 F. Michal 1949 F F F K.

Senecio vulgaris L. Silene ×hampeana Meusel et Werner Silene latifolia subsp. Silene viridiflora L. subsp. Schismus barbatus (L. B. Senecio inaequidens DC. Silene ×grecescui Gusul. Sedum hybridum L. Sisymbrium austriacum Jacq.) P. Scorpiurus muricatus L. Secale cereale L. Silene armeria L. Silene cretica subsp. subsp. moharia (Alef. erectum t’Hart Sedum sarmentosum Bunge Sedum spurium M. et K. subsp. Sisymbrium loeselii L.) Scop. Senecio rupestris W. Gmelin Sempervivum tectorum L. Scrophularia canina L. Setaria adhaerens (Forska ˚l) Chiovenda Setaria faberi Herrmann Setaria gussonei Kerguélen Setaria italica (L. pycnocoma (Steud. B. Sedum stoloniferum S.) P.) P. Senecio vernalis W. Sisymbrium altissimum L. Sida hermaphrodita (L. viridis Sherardia arvensis L. Silphium perfoliatum L. Bieb.) Tzvelev Setaria viridis (L. Sedum annuum L. annulata (Thore) Hayek Silene dichotoma Ehrh. rhombifolia Sida spinosa L. Sedum aizoon L. Schkuhria pinnata (Lam. Setaria verticillata (L. Sisymbrium orientale subsp. Silene pendula L. et Spach Scutellaria altissima L. Silybum marianum (L. Setaria viridis subsp. 2002 1st 1866 1961 1855 1901 1880 Landuse NSH H H SH SH H SH SH S SH SH H H SH NS SH H H S H H H H H H H H H H H H H H SH H H H H H SH H NS SH H H H NS N H H SH NSH H H H H Landscape T M M T T TM T T T TM T TM TM TM T TM T M T TM TM M M TM TM TM TM TM M TM T M T TM TM M M TM T TM T T TM T TM TM T T M TM TM T TM TM TM T 2001 1879 2001 1819 1997 1879 1872 1961 1961 1950 1880 1958 1979 1972 1850 1941 1841 1972 1896 1971 1885 1872 1815 1858 1851 1819 1958 . italica Setaria italica subsp.) Rusby Sida rhombifolia L. Silene gallica L.) Chamberlain Sedum rupestre subsp. Sedum pallidum var. Sedum anopetalum DC.) Gaertner Sinapis arvensis L.) Thell. subsp. Kuntze Sicyos angulata L.) Körnicke Setaria pumila (Poiret) R. alba (Miller) Greuter et Burdet Silene noctiflora L. Sedum hispanicum L. Sisymbrium officinale (L.) O. macroloma (Pomel) Dvořák Fam Sol Fab Scr Scr Lam Gra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Cra Com Com Com Com Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Gra Rub Gra Com Cuc Mal Mal Mal Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Com Com Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Bra Stat nat cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat inv nat cas nat cas nat cas nat cas cas nat nat* cas nat nat* cas cas nat* nat* cas nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat cas nat nat* nat cas cas cas# cas cas nat* nat cas cas inv nat cas Res neo neo neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar ar ar arN arM neo arN ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo ar ar arN arI neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo arN neo Preslia 74: 97–186. et Sch. bithynicum (Boiss. B. austriacum Sisymbrium irio L.174 Taxon Scopolia carniolica Jacq. et K. Scrophularia chrysantha Jaub.

Jehlík 1971a. & Skočdopolová 1996 F K F F F. Holub 1972 F F F F F F K. Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K.Pyšek et al. Smejkal 1973 K K F F F F. Chrtek J. 1998 K K K K K K K F K. Smejkal 1973 F F. Šourková 1978 F F F F F F. Chrtek 1981 F F F F F F. Dvořák 1982 F F F Syntaxa TA Ae Abund LocNo Intr r r e e sc r r s r sc r s sc r la r r r e la c r sc r r r c la r sc sc se r r r r r r e sc r sc c c e r se r r c c e r c c e 1 1 1 1 3 5 2 1 1 4 2 1 3 1 4 1 3 1 2 5 5 1 3 2 3 3 5 5 1 5 5 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 1 4 3 4 5 5 1 1 1 2 3 5 5 1 2 5 5 2 d a a d d d d d d d d d d d d d d a a a a a a a d d a a a a a a a d d a a ad a a a a a a a d d d d ad a a a a a a Origin E E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AS GA Si MP Ab Cm Cm Ab Cm AS Ab CA Ab Al Si Ah Sh VE Si PS Er Cl PS Si Si PS Si PS Er Cl PS Er PS Er DM Sc AS Si Sh Sh Cl Ah GA Al BS DM VT Ar Ah Ae IS CA DM Oa PR Bd Al VT Cl VT Sh Cr Si Oa VE SO PS Si Si Sr Er Si Si Si Mn pe a pe b pe pe a AS pe E ab E AS pe E AS pe AS pe E AS pe E pe AS pe AS pe AS pe E pe AF pe E a E AS a E AS a AS AF AMC AMS a AS a a a a E AS a E a E AS a E AS a E AS AF a E a AMC AMS a AMN a AMN pe AMN AMC AMS ss AS AF AMN AMC AMS pe ss E a E a E AS ab E ab ? E AS AF pe a E AS ab ? E a E pe AMN pe E a E AS AF a E AS a E b pe E AS a E AS AF a E AS AF a E a .: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 175 LH Source F F F F. Mandák & Bímová 2001 K K K K K.

Stachys affinis Bunge Stachys annua (L. subsp. Solanum scabrum Mill. Solanum decipiens Opiz Solanum linneanum Hepper et Jaeger Solanum lycopersicum L. Smyrnium perfoliatum L. Tagetes erecta L. Stachys byzantina C. Sonchus arvensis L. Symphoricarpos albus (L. Spiraea alba Duroi Spiraea ×billardii Dippel Spiraea chamaedryfolia L. Sisymbrium volgense M. Solanum villosum Mill.176 Taxon Sisymbrium polymorphum (Murray) Roth Sisymbrium strictissimum L. maxima (Weihe) O.) L. sativa (Boenn. Spiraea douglasii Hooker Spiraea ×macrothyrsa Dippel Sporobolus elongatus (Lam. Spinacia oleracea L. Braun Sorbus domestica L. Spiraea crenata L. Solidago canadensis L. arvensis Spergula arvensis L. Fam Bra Bra Bra Iri Api Api Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Sol Com Com Com Com Com Com Ros Ros Gra Gra Gra Car Car Car Car Car Chen Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Ros Gra Lam Lam Lam Lam Car Cap Cap Bor Bor Ole Com Stat cas nat nat nat cas nat cas cas cas nat cas cas cas nat* cas cas# cas cas cas cas cas cas inv inv cas nat* nat nat* nat# cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas nat cas# cas# cas cas nat* nat cas nat* inv cas# cas nat inv cas Res neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM arM ar neo neo neo neo neo arN ar ar ar arB arM neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM arN neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. arvensis Sonchus asper (L. Sorbaria sorbifolia (L. Solanum americanum Mill.) Pers. Stachys arvensis (L. Solanum cornutum L.) Hill Sonchus oleraceus L.) Salisb. Solanum tuberosum L. Solanum carolinense L. subsp. Solanum triflorum Nutt.) Čelak. linicola (Boreau) Janchen Spergula arvensis subsp. arvensis × S. Solanum physalifolium Rusby Solanum pseudocapsicum L. sativa Spergula arvensis subsp. Bieb ex E.) L. subsp.) R. Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf Spergula arvensis L.) Blake Symphoricarpos orbiculatus Moench Symphytum asperum Lepechin Symphytum ×upplandicum Nyman Syringa vulgaris L.) Murb. Solanum melongena L.) A. Sorghum bicolor (L. Solanum nigrum L. Schwarz Spergula arvensis subsp. Solanum pyracanthos Lam. 2002 1st 1959 1819 1960 1863 1886 1966 1985 1899 1819 1880 Landuse H NSH H S S NSH H H H H H SH H H H H H H H H H H NSH NSH H SH H H NS NS H H H H H H H H H H H NSH N SH H H H H H NS NSH H H SH NSH H Landscape M T TM T T TM M M TM TM TM TM TM TM M TM M TM TM M TM M TM TM TM TM TM TM T T M M M T T T T T TM T TM T T T M T T T TM TM TM TM TM T T TM 1975 1940 1975 1935 1914 1850 1838 1851 1940 1927 1900 1889 1940 1961 1924 1941 1908 1809 . Foum Sisyrinchium angustifolium Mill. Solanum sisymbriifolium Lam. Br. Koch Stellaria pallida (Dumort. Sium sisarum L. Solidago gigantea Aiton Solidago graminifolia (L.) Moench Sorghum halepense (L.

1973 K. Dvořák 1981 F F. Smejkal 1978 F F K Syntaxa Al GA Bd BS TA Al DM Si Ar Ap GA CR Ai BS Abund LocNo Intr e sc r r s r r e r sc s la r c r r e r r e c s c c r c c c r r r r r c r e e sc r r r r s r r se e r e r sc sc r r r sc r 1 4 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 5 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 5 1 5 5 1 5 5 5 2 3 2 1 1 5 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 5 2 2 5 5 3 2 4 5 2 a ad a d a ad a a a a a d d a a d d d ad a d a d d d a a a d d d a a a a ad ad ad d d d d d d d a d a a d a d d d ad d d Origin E AS E E AMN E E AS AMN AMS AMN AMN E AF AMC AMS AS AF E AMS AMS AF AF AMS AMN AMS E AS AF AMN AMN AMN E E E AS E AS AF AF E AS AF E AS Si VE Al Bi Cb Si VE Si Si VE Ar DM Al Ae BS SS St Ar Ae Sf BS CR Si Pa VE VE Si VE Si Cr Bd SO PS Ah Ah Ah SO PS Ah Si Cl VE Si Ah SO Ab MP BS BS Cr Ae Ae Ar Ap Ae Pa Bd BS pe pe pe pe pe b a pe a pe a a ss s a a pe a a ss s pe a a pe a pe pe a pe pe pe pe a a s t a pe a a a E AS a E AS a E AS a AS a AMN s s E AS s E AS s AMN s s AS AF AMC AMS pe AS pe E AS a E AS AF a AS pe E a AMN s AMN s AS pe pe E st AMC a . Křísa et al. Hejný et al. Hejný et al. Jehlík 1971b. Müller 1998 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F K K K K K K F F K K. 1973. Jehlík 1998 K F F F F F F F F F F F F Dvořák & Kühn 1966 K. 1998. 1968.Pyšek et al. Pospíšil 1952. Kotlaba 1952 K F. Novák 1924. 1981. Chrtek 1994 F F F F F F F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 177 LH Source F.

et Mart. Trifolium ornithopodioides L.) Ser. Teucrium scorodonia L. Trifolium pallidum W. hybridum Trifolium incarnatum L. Tilia tomentosa Moench Torilis arvensis (Hudson) Link subsp.) Holub Valerianella rimosa Bast. Trifolium subterraneum L. Bieb. Tripleurospermum inodorum (L. Tribulus terrestris L. incarnatum Trifolium lappaceum L. Tragopogon dubius Scop. Trifolium resupinatum L. Tragopogon ×mirabilis Rouy Tragopogon porrifolius L. sativum (Schreber) Schübl.) Pollich subsp. Trigonella foenum-graceum L. Trifolium squamosum L. Thlaspi kovatsii Heuff. Trifolium angulatum W. Fam Com Com Com Com Aiz Lam Lam Lam Cuc Bra Bra Lam Lam Til Api Api Com Com Com Gra Zyg Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Com Gra Gra Gra Gra Tro Lil Lil Api Fab Urt Urt Urt Car Val Val Val Hydc Stat cas nat inv inv cas cas cas nat cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat* cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas cas cas nat cas cas cas cas cas cas cas cas inv cas cas cas cas cas cas cas nat* cas# cas cas nat* nat* nat* nat* nat* cas Res neo ar ar neo neo neo neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo ar neo ar neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo neo arM ar ar neo neo neo neo neo ar neo neo neo arN arP arN ar ar neo Preslia 74: 97–186. americanum (C. arvensis Torilis nodosa (L. dentata Valerianella dentata subsp. eriosperma (Wallr. O. Kuntze Teucrium marum L. Ulex europaeus L. Tulipa ×gesnerana L.) Baumg. Trigonella caerulea (L. Tanacetum parthenium (L. Tropaeolum majus L. subsp. Trifolium angustifolium M. Trifolium alexandrinum L. Thladiantha dubia Bunge Thlaspi arvense L. Trifolium tomentosum L. Trifolium hybridum L. Trifolium glomeratum L.) Holub Valerianella dentata (L. Tetragonia tetragonoides (Pallas) O.) Hoffm. Teucrium polium L. et K.) Schultz-Bip. Vaccaria hispanica subsp. Urtica urens L. Harz) Soják Trifolium pratense subsp. Tulipa sylvestris L. Trifolium pannonicum Jacq. et K. Vallisneria spiralis L. grandiflora (Ser.178 Taxon Tagetes patula L. Tanacetum vulgare L. 2002 1st Landuse H H SH SH H H H SH SH H H NS SH H H H SH H H H H H N H H SH SH H H H NS SH H H H H H H H H H H H H H SH NSH H S H H H H H H H N Landscape TM T TM T TM TM TM T TM TM M T TM M T T TM TM TM TM M M T T M TM T M M M T T TM TM M M M T T TM TM T T T TM TM T T T TM TM T T T T T T 1918 1960 1806 1939 1974 2001 1872 1960 1976 1923 1961 1819 1870 1916 1960 1930 1919 1880 1853 1930 1962 1961 1874 1889 1867 1880 1872 . subsp. Thymus drucei Ronniger Thymus vulgaris L. Tragus racemosus (L. Trifolium pratense subsp. Turgenia latifolia (L.) Gaertn.) All. Telekia speciosa (Schreb. Triticum dicoccon Schrank Triticum polonicum L. Urtica pilulifera L. Urtica dodartii L. Triticum turgidum L.) Schultze Triticum aestivum L.

Hendrych 1968 F F F F F F F F K K K K K F K K F F F F F F F. Čáp 1982 F F F F K K K K F F F F F F F F F F F.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 179 LH a pe pe pe a s s pe ss pe ab pe ss s ss t a a a a pe a a a a a a a b pe ab a a ab pe pe pe a a a a a a a a a a a a pe pe a s pe a a a a a a pe Source K K K K F F F F. Holub 1978c F F K Syntaxa Si Cm Al Si Al CA Ar Ae Ai IS Abund LocNo Intr r sc c sc r r e r r c s r r r r e c r r r r e e se e c sc e e e r e sc r e r e sc sc c sc r r r r sc r e r r r c e sc r r e 3 5 5 4 1 1 1 3 3 5 1 1 2 1 3 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 5 3 1 2 1 3 3 5 5 1 1 1 3 4 3 3 1 1 2 5 4 5 4 4 1 d d a d d d a ad d a a d d d a a a a d a a ad a a a d ad a a a ad d d ad a a a d d a d a a a d d d a d d d a a a a a d Origin AMC E AS E E AMS AS AU E E AS AF E AS E AS E E E E E AS E E E E E AS E E E AS E AS E AS E E AS E E AS E GQ LF CE Si Ae VE SO Ah Oa Al DM Cl DM Sc Sr Er MP Ap C Ar Pa Pa Ar Pa Ar Si DM Si SO PS AS E AS E AS AF E AS E E AS E E AMS E E AS AF E E E E AS E E AS AF E E AF AS Si VE Ar Ae Cr Ai TA Cl Mn Cb Cl Sh Cl Cl Sh Fv Cl Sh . Kubát 1993 F F F F.Pyšek et al.

Verbena rigida Sprengel Veronica acinifolia L. Vicia narbonensis L. Viola ×hungarica Degen et Sabr.) Holub Vitis riparia Michx Vitis vinifera L. Vicia pannonica Crantz subsp.) S. Murr Vicia sativa L. Verbena bonariensis L. Verbena ×hybrida hort. Gray Fam Scr Ver Ver Ver Ver Ver Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Scr Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Fab Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Vio Dip Vit Vit Gra Stat cas cas cas cas nat* cas cas nat* nat* inv inv nat* cas inv nat* nat* nat* nat* cas cas nat* cas cas nat* nat cas cas cas cas nat nat cas nat* nat* nat* cas# cas nat nat cas cas inv cas nat nat inv cas nat cas nat* cas cas inv cas cas nat Res neo neo neo neo arN neo neo ar ar neo arN ar neo neo arM ar ar ar neo neo ar neo neo neo arN neo neo neo neo ar neo neo ar ar arI neo neo neo arM neo neo arM arM arM arM arM neo neo neo ar neo neo neo neo arM ar Preslia 74: 97–186. 2002 1st 1914 1983 1853 Landuse SH H H H H H H NSH NSH SH NSH H NSH H H H H SH H H H H H SH SH NSH SH H H SH SH SH SH NSH NSH H NS NS NS N NS NSH S NS NSH NSH S NSH N SH SH H H SH SH SH Landscape TM M M T T M TM T TM TM TM T T TM TM T T TM TM TM TM T TM T TM T T TM TM T T T TM T TM TM T T T T T TM T T T TM T TM T T TM TM TM TM TM T 1967 1908 1938 1809 1809 1874 1949 1874 1877 1900 1980 1948 1959 1886 1904 1895 1953 1864 1964 . Vicia faba L. Vicia villosa Roth subsp. Vicia articulata Hornem. Veronica filiformis Sm. visianinum (Reichenb. Vicia onobrychioides L. Viola ×wittrockiana Gams Virga strigosa (R. Viola ×kerneri Wiesb. Viola obliqua Hill. Viola ×haynaldii Wiesb. Vicia angustifolia L. Vicia melanops Sibth.180 Taxon Verbascum niveum subsp. subsp. peregrina Veronica persica Poiret Veronica polita Fries Veronica triloba (Opiz) Wiesb. subsp. vinifera Vulpia bromoides (L.) S. rugulosa (Greene) Hitchc. Viola ×scabra F. Vicia grandiflora Scop. Viola cornuta L. et Sm. Vicia villosa subsp.) L. Viola ×pluricaulis Borbás Viola ×poelliana Murr.) Willd. subsp. Forster) Syme Viola tricolor L. Veronica agrestis L. curtisii (E. subsp. Viola odorata L. grandiflora Vicia hirsuta (L. pannonica Vicia pannonica subsp. Viola ×porphyrea Uechtr. Veronica hederifolia L. Verbena chamaedryfolia Juss. Verbena officinalis L. striata (M. F. Veronica arvensis L. subsp. F. Vicia cordata Hoppe Vicia ervilia (L. Vicia bithynica (L. tricolor Viola ×vindobonensis Wiesb. Bieb. Veronica triphyllos L. villosa Viola canadensis var. varia (Host) Corb.) Nyman Vicia ×poechhackeri J.) Murb. Bieb. et Sch. Braun Viola ×sourekii Procházka Viola suavis M. Viola tricolor L. Veronica opaca Fries Veronica peregrina L. Gray Vicia lutea L.

: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 181 LH b pe ss ss a pe a pe a a a pe a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a pe a a a a a ab pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe pe ? pe pe a pe ab b s t ab Source F F F F F F F. Sutorý 1976 K F F F F F.Pyšek et al. Kirschner & Štěpánek 1984 F F F F F F F F F F F F. Jehlík & Slavík 1967. Saul 1983 F F F F F F F. Hejný et al. Skalický 1973 F F F F. Lhotská 1968b F F K Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr e e e r sc se r r c sc c r r c c r sc c sc e r r r sc c r e r e sc r r c c c se r r r e se c e r sc sc r r r sc r sc la r r r 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 5 5 4 5 4 2 5 5 4 5 5 4 1 3 2 3 4 5 2 1 2 1 4 3 1 5 5 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 4 5 1 3 1 5 1 4 4 1 4 2 a ad d d a d a a a d a a a a a a a a d a a d d a a a a ad a ad a a ad ad ad d d a a a d d a a a a a d a a a d d d d a Origin E AMS AMS E AS AF AMS E E AF E AS E AS E AS AF E AMN AMC AMS AS E E E E AS AF E AS AF E AS E AS E AS AS AF E AS E AS E AS AF E E AS E E E AS AF E AS AF E E AS AMN E Al Pa MP Ah Sh VE Ab AS Ab Ap Ar Cy Pa Ae Ah Sh Si BS BR CR Cr VE Bi Es Sg VE Sh Ah Si VT VE Cl Mn Cl Ah Ab Sh Cl PS Ab Fv KP AS DM Cl Sh Ah Ar CA Tm Ah KP PF Ab Cl Fv Br Ar Ar Ps Fv Br Cl Fv Br Ar KP Cl Sh Ah Pa PS VT PF DM Cl Sh Ar Ah Sh Ar CA Vc PT Ar Fv Fv Br Bd GA BS CR Cr Ai Ae AMN E AS AF Bd Cr Br GA BS Cr BR Bd GA TA PT GA BS CR Ae Co SO Si Ar Bd TA BS GA Si Al Ae GA BS CA PR Bd Th E AS E E E AS AMN E AS E . Kirschner & Štěpánek 1984 F. Jehlík 1998 F F F. Skřivánek 1949 F F F. 1973. Smejkal 1970 F F F. Jehlík 1961. Peniašteková & Feráková 1993 F F F F F F F. 1998.

Žatec. distr. — Centaurea nigra × phrygia. Tanvald. P. com.) Mak. com. bithynicum. South Moravia (BRNM – Krahulec.) C. Wool or cotton casual native to Mediterranean. on the bank of Ohře river along the road to Podbořany (1982. in prep. Jehlík PRA). Otradovice near Lysá nad Labem. Jehlík PRA). — Oenothera coronifera. V. Procházka.) Link Vulpia myuros (L. Xanthium strumarium L. Selected localities: Praha 8. Praha-Holešovice: W part of the Vltava river port (all localities 1971. Trojská street: at a wall base (2001. Kirschner & O.182 Taxon Vulpia ciliata Dum. Na Čečeličce street. M. mesatlanticum. the character of the locality indicates accidental introduction. Jehlík PRA). pers. pers. — Rodgersia aesculifolia. 87/III). In fact. Vulpia ligustica (All. Krásná Lípa: rarely on the main railway station. pers. V.g. Příbram: wetland patch with Menyathes trifoliata in a park near a football stadium (2001. Wool casual. V. — Bromus hordeaceus subsp. distr. V. was found escaped from cultivation in Maršovice. The species originates from N Africa (Morocco) and is rarely planted in the Czech Republic. comm. 0. pers. Sádlo). Beroun: it was found in 2001 at the Berounka . V. V. com. Scholz Xanthium ripicola Holub Xanthium spinosum L. Since planting is not mentioned in Czech garden literature. — Allium atropurpureum W. distr. Jasenný.9 m in diameter was found. Sušice. SW from the Pekelský vrch hill (1963.). Liberec: several plants on a waste deposit near the Textilana spinning mill (1967. Dvůr Králové nad Labem (J. native from E Europe to Middle Asia.). Taxonomic identity of this species requires further study (see Clement & Foster 1994: 300). — Alhagi pseudalhagi. — Gilia capitata. distr. Mihulka et al. Zelkova serrata (Thunb. — Helianthus strumosus. Pyšková PRA). and might have been introduced into Czech Republic from Berlin where it is rather common.). — Sedum pallidum var.. Jehlík PRA). It grows on the Kunětická hora hill near Pardubice (J. P.) Trehane Xanthophthalmum segetum (L. — Centaurea ×gerstlaueri.). Král). Chrtek jun. Horváthová – M. — Parietaria pennsylvanica. Jehlík PRA). Xanthophthalmum coronarium (L. Třeboň region: sand pit near the village of Halámky in the southern part of the basin (2001. distr. e. including Atlantic Islands.). Jehlík PRA). It formerly occurred on several other localities in the town of Klatovy but disappeared due to building activities (2001. Native to Mediterranean. Karlštejn. Česká Skalice II – Malá Skalice: one specimen on the yard of the Tiba spinning mill on the Úpa river bank (1964. Hrdoňovice and Nová Paka. Houda PRA). Jehlík PRA). in gardens and cemeteries. České Budějovice: cca 30 plants grew in a mixed stand with O. — Cerastium ×maureri. Jasenný.). Zea mays L. Praha 5. Arizona. it is uncertain whether it was introduced accidentally or escaped from cultivation. Jičín: rarely between tracks at railway stations in both settlements. Štech.). Native to China. arvense subsp. Waldsteinia trifolia Rochel ex Koch Xanthium albinum (Widd. Český Krumlov. Semily: rarely at railway station (1966. distr. Zinnia elegans Jacq. Pyšek & J. Gmelin Waldsteinia geoides Willd. arvense was suspected but not confirmed by Smejkal in Hejný & Slavík (1992). it has been overlooked as it is rather common around cabins and cottages. com. — Papaver atlanticum subsp. hospital: several plants near the entrance gate and by the nutrition department. Mandák). its occurence is associated with intentional introductions of many species which were planted at the locality in the 1930s by a natural-historical society from Pardubice (F. 16. including Atlantic Islands. J.) H. Březina). Semily: rarely on railway station. about 30 plants were first observed in 2000 (J. pseudothominii. Pyšek & B. V. issleri at a railway station (2001. Fam Gra Gra Gra Ros Ros Com Com Com Com Com Com Gra Ulm Com Stat cas cas nat cas nat nat cas nat* nat* cas cas cas cas cas Res neo neo ar neo neo neo neo neo arB neo neo neo neo neo Preslia 74: 97–186. A single clone ca. Raspenava. Occurence of the cross between the neophyte C. ruderal habitats in towns. Zliv. Reported from two localities (Kutná hora. in prep. The species is native to North America where it grows from Alaska to California. rarely at the perifery of the main railway station (all localities 1966. 2002 1st Landuse H H SH S S S H H H H H H N H Landscape M M T T T T TM T TM TM T M TM TM 1872 1872 1879 1872 1973 New additions to the alien flora of the Czech Republic: Agrostis scabra.) Schultz-Bip. — Polypogon fugax. et K. — Carduus tenuiflorus. Klatovy: yard of a school canteen (house no. Utah. pers. Liberec: 1 specimen in the garden of the house no. Idaho (Kartesz & Meacham 1999). — Hieracium pannosum. Sádlo PRA. The species is native to N America. V. Seldom planted in gardens. C. Native to E North America (J. Liberec: 1 specimen found on the wool-waste deposits of Textilana spinning mill (1967. Horní Slavkov. tomentosum and native C. — Hordeum leporinum. Šída.

J. J. — Cotoneaster bullatus. J. — Aesculus ×carnea. It is rarely planted (e. Native to Caucasus. Sádlo).: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 183 Source K K K F F K K K K. Reported neither by the Flora of the Czech Republic nor by Kubát et al. (2002) is based on the same locality. com. — Beta vulgaris group Cicla. Kunětická hora hill near Pardubice. A single clone ca 1 m2 in size was found. Escapes by seed. ca 0.Pyšek et al. Sádlo). distr. near the Dolní Sytová village. — Acer monspessulanum. Procházka. Bauer. — Celtis occidentalis. pers. com. Sádlo). J. Sádlo). Sádlo). Liberec: escaped and growing in a park hedgerow (2001. on compost piles.). Klatovy: two localities near the Větrovna quarry where the plants were probably introduced from the nearby cemetery (2001. J. It is seldom planted as a garden ornamental and very rarely escapes from cultivation. Praha-Petřín: young shrubs escaped from cultivation in the park (2001. Z.g. . usually in garden composts. Mandák PRA). Jindřichův Hradec (ca. V. — Chamaecyparis lawsoniana. albeit without a concrete locality (an old record by Dostál 1954 from the vicinity of the town of Velvary is erroneous). Praha-Radotín: as a cultivation relic on a rock in the area of cement works. pers. — Chaenomeles japonica. Jehlík PRA). J. Jilemnice. Kolbek & J. Král. pers. J. escaped from cultivation. Praha-Libeň: along tracks at the railway station in a depression between two railway embankments (2001. National park Czech-Saxonian Switzerlan (N Bohemia): self-seeding in a sandstone valley NE of the Koliště hill (P. — Cotoneaster horizontalis. Pec pod Sněžkou (J. it corresponds to the cultivar grown during WWI (M. (2002). along roads and paths. A garden escape found in the vicinity of mountain chalets and gardens. Semily: ca 5 km NW of the town. young trees about ± 1 m tall were found growing in the park where adult trees are planted (2001. only by Dostál (1989). the localities represent clonally spreading cultivation relics. and occasionally persists for few years (Praha-Satalice. com. M. Sádlo PRA). — Sedum stoloniferum. M. The record reported here is the first evidence of cultivation escape and the mention in Kubát et al. pers. cemetery in Klatovy) and originates from SE Europe and SW Asia. it has spread since then and persists (F. J. (2002) but not reported as escaping from cultivation: Acer ginnala. Procházka. — Beta vulgaris group Vulgaris. com. Praha: Vinohrady hospital. com. Brno-Řečkovice: Žitná street. B. Pyšek). — Castanea sativa. several localities in the České Středohoří hills (2000. Pyšková & P. Mandák). Semily: two-year old sapling was found at the perifery of railway station (1964. Praha: Vinohrady hospital (2001. Opatrná. Kaplan PRA). Ronov nad Doubravou (ca 1998. Sádlo). Král). Native to North America (British Columbia). Species treated in the Flora of the Czech Republic or in Kubát et al.). pers. The species grows there as a cultivation relic planted in the 1930s by a natural-historical society from the town of Pardubice.). alba. it has spread since then and persists (F. — Corydalis alba subsp. It grows on Kunětická hora hill near Pardubice as a cultivation relic planted in the 1930s by a natural-historical society from the town of Pardubice. J. rubbish tips and in the vicinity of sugar refineries.). The species was reported in the Flora of the Czech Republic as very rarely escaping from cultivation. 1995. Escapes by seed on field margins. Sádlo). Opravil 1963 K K K K K Syntaxa Abund LocNo Intr r r sc s s la r r la r r sc s r 2 2 4 1 1 4 1 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 a a a a a a a a a d ad d d d Origin E E E E E AMN E AMS E AS E E AMC AS AMC LH a a ab pe pe a a a a a a a t a Th PS Pa Oa Mn Oa Mn Si PS Er Ah Sn Si river bank during the floristic summer school organized by the Czech Botanical Society (det. Praha 8: numerous population of shrubs of various ages (up to several years) originated from seed was found between the tram stops Trojská and Nad Trojou (2001. — Chrysanthemum indicum. — Buddleja davidii. — Astilbe ×arendsii. Praha-Petřín. — Campanula speciosa. — Corylus colurna.2 km from the bridge upstream across the Jizera river (1999. Garden escape at rubbish tips in cemeteries and allotments. Sádlo) and near Litošice in the Železné hory Mts (B.).

pers. a plant established from a discarded root has been persisting since ca. — Tilia tomentosa. Vicherek). in a soil deposit near underground station (2000. pers. First reported as garden escape from a hill near Podhradice NE of Bílina (Polívka 1901). In both localities. growing in a ruderal habitat by a house (2001. distr. Liberec: escaped by seed in open spaces and in the streets.). Praha-západ (2001. — Crataegus persimilis. pers. the species spreads by rooting of shoots (2001. Mandák). Srbsko. Sádlo). pers. 1 km SW of the town. Recently. Escapes occasionally from cultivation in gardens and parks (J. Sádlo). com. pers. district of Brno: deciduous forest on the Mniší hora hill E of the Kníničky village (1995. distr. Pyšek & B. — Tulipa ×gesnerana. Bohemian Karst: Koněprusy. Although the species should be considered as naturalized. neither the Flora of the Czech Republic nor Kubát et al. Ranšpurk nature reserve (Vicherek et al. shrubs along a path between fields (1993. Kozomín near Kralupy nad Vltavou: two flowering plants on a rubbish tip at the village perifery (1996. Mandák PRA. It was reported as long persistent (1866–1880) from school garden in Valteřice near Česká Lípa (Čelakovský 1881). Sádlo). Occasionally planted in the wild and surviving as a cultivation relic. pers. distr. Štech.). allotments in Slabčice near the Vltava river (M. Průhonice: numerous self-seeded young plants around planted adults (2001. 2000). — Deutzia scabra. P. it was found as a garden escape in the region of Křivoklát (J. . S Moravia: rather frequent in forest plantations at the confluence of the Morava and Dyje rivers. — Populus balsamifera. J. Praha. Sádlo). Sádlo). — Iris pallida. pers. Beroun (J. Pejchal. com. e. e. — Paeonia officinalis. in prep. J. probably as a cultivation relic (J. J. pers. com. J. Sádlo). (2002) mention escaping from cultivation. Břeclav: rather easily escaping from cultivation in the chateau park and its surroundings (M. — Platanus ×hispanica. Lednice. Praha-Libeň. and in ruderal grassland in Praha-Satalice (J.g. Javorník (distr. slope with scrub above the Rokytka brook. distr. Beroun: a plant established from rubbish deposited in the limestone quarry Na Chlumu has been persisting for ca. Garden escape at fishpond barrier in Malenice near Volyně. Praha-Karlovo náměstí square: several young trees from self-seeding. and penetrates into surrounding vegetation (J. intensively escaping from cultivation in places. Vinoř: in the village. Jehlík PRA). Escapes from cultivation in gardens. Recently. Escapes occasionally from cultivation in gardens and parks. Old records about escapes from cultivation (Čelakovský 1867–1881. M. Holub). it grows in Praha-Divoká Šárka. — Lycium chinense. — Hosta plantaginea. First reported as a cultivation escape by Čelakovský (1880) along the road from Česká Lípa to Nové Zámky and by Velenovský from the region of Blatná. com. Naturalized as a cultivation relic in the Terčino údolí valley near Nové Hrady. comm. At present. several specimens were reported by Čelakovský (1872) growing on the “Niklasberg” (Mikulášský kopec) hill near Český Krumlov but it was not possible to determine whether or not these were planted and persisted as cultivation relics. Zlatá Koruna. 20 years. Praha 5-Černý vrch: several young shrubs in open spaces and among shrub plantations (2001. — Miscanthus sinensis. det. Řehořek). — Ricinus communis. com.). J. com. Štech. Sádlo). J. J. — Salix ×sepulcralis. Nebanice. — Crocus flavus. and still grows there (M.). 1900–1904) are doubtful (Grulich in Hejný & Slavík 1992). Hladíková). M. and spreads slightly (J. — Physalis pubescens. Morávka. Reported by Dostál (1989) as intentionally planted in the wild near Praha-Hlubočepy. pers. Sádlo). Břeclav: escaping from cultivation in the chateau park (M. Praha-Spořilov. Praha-Troja: south-oriented slopes above the Trojská street and elsewhere around (approximately since the 1950s). (2002) mention escape from cultivation. P. Recently. Praha-Radotín: a single shrub on a Vltava river alluvium (2001. Holub. V.). distr. distr. — Hippophaë rhamnoides. com. J. Pejchal. 1995 in Praha-Jinonice. rubbish tips and villages. — Doronicum columnae. S Bohemia. — Juglans nigra. Praha: Vinohrady hospital. — Potentilla fruticosa. Sádlo).). Jeseník): the Jánský vrch hill ca. — Crataegus flabellata. — Prunus virginiana. In the past. — Scopolia carniolica. — Sedum annuum. three specimens were found in Stará Paka (distr. Lednice. — Doronicum orientale. it has been known from there since 1884 (Čelakovský 1885). Procházka. Recently. J. 10 plants was found in Žampach.g. it has spread since then and persists (F. Sádlo). distr.). waste places. Sádlo PRA). 2002 between a stone wall base and asphalt pavement (2001. Neither the Flora of the Czech Republic nor Kubát et al. Cheb: it grows as a clonally spreading cultivation relic around a poorly maintained church. Břeclav: escaped from cultivation in the chateau park (M. Český Krumlov: in the village (2001.184 Preslia 74: 97–186. Lepší. Pyšek & B. — Fraxinus ornus. among cobble stones (2001. Pejchal. Botičská street: an adult tree originated from seed was observed in 1990 and later cut down (J. Hadinec.). Frýdek-Místek: understory of a beech woodland at the bank of the Morávka river (1999. — Prunus laurocerasus. The species grows as a cultivation relic planted in the 1930s by a natural-historical society from the town of Pardubice. com. Kunětická hora hill near Pardubice. V. J.). a small established population of ca.) — Forsythia suspensa. Jičín) growing at the perifery of the railway station (1964. distr. Sádlo). Kolbek. Sádlo). Lednice.

V. This taxon was first reported as Bromopsis pumpelliana subsp. Pollen of this aggregate species was found in Mesolith (P. J. in prep.). A. with which it is often confused. herbarium specimen of A. Hadinec & P. com.. belongs to this species (F. Hendrych. Recently. in 1991. in the population of both parents (Čelakovský 1888b). For this reason. later. — Setaria faberi. Reported from the Vltava river bank (Knaf 1825 PR – Jehlík in Slavík 1997). tournefortii. This hybrid was found in 1887 near Ročov. — Bunias orientalis. com. Jehlík 1998) are included here within this taxon. — ×Conygeron huelsenii. — Oenothera stricta. however. which is considered an apophyte (in the sense of Holub & Jirásek 1967) whereas P. in a clearing by the road from Netluky to Třeskonice.: Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic 185 Remarks on other species: Acorus calamus. aviculare s. carpinifolia in the Flora of the Czech Republic (Hrouda in Slavík 1988). com. albeit without further details. — Amelanchier lamarckii. These plants belong to another taxon. near the village of Sokolnice (Dostál 1948–1950. Pokorný. We believe that this finding concerns P. com. The herbarium specimen collected by Čelakovský in Praha-Chuchle 1866.). The Caucasian species V. as did De Candolle in 1815. V. and listed since then in several floras (Dostál 1948–1950. filiformis was described by Smith in 1791. which qualifies it as a native species. on the basis of its ecology and distribution outside the territory of the Czech Republic. lamarckii. Krahulec. The species is considered as a neophyte but the time of its immigration into Central Europe requires further study as it is listed by Lang (1994) as an archaeophyte having arrived in the Middle Ages. also mentioned as garden escape by Polívka (1900–1904).). Pyšek PRA). is considered an archaeophyte. The latter species easily escapes from cultivation in western Europe (M. Also reported by Rydlo (1992) as planted in a pool near the village of Račice at Křivoklát region. Not listed in Kubát et al. Nymburk): ca. pers.). Osek (distr. 1989) under the name Allium odorum L. Pejchal.).). two tussocks were collected on a rubbish tip in Brno-Pisárky. — Cyperus eragrostis. inermis (F. has been discovered recently (F. Pejchal. distr. The same mistake was made by Pohl (1809) and Opiz (1823). A single plant appeared on an emergent bottom of the water reservoir in Jablonec nad Nisou (Petřík 2002). — Allium tuberosum. and later by the same author (Rydlo 2001) from the section of Labe river between Mělník and Hrobce. pers. Besser used the same name for V. Havlíček). str. pumpellianus and B. . Vroutek. macrocarpa Lucznik by some authors (e. Pyšek & P. In 1947. Krahulec.). — Allim atroviolaceum. Erroneously reported as Z. Unfortunately. grown for its fruits and medicinal use. A. arenastrum Bor. buxbaumii) in 1809. com. in prep. Hundred and twenty specimens were planted on arable land in the arboretum near “Tři grácie” near Lednice in S Moravia. The old records relate to A. a more abundant source population was found in a semi-natural reed stand by a small pond (Grüll 1952). — Eichhornia crassipes. filiformis was introduced as late as in 1938. Plants treated as S. (2002). filiformis in their Flora Čechica but the record relates to V. persica. C Bohemia. pers. filiformis for the Czech flora (Bohumil Slavík. South Moravia. Čelakovský (1867–1881) obviously distinguished between the two species and avoided the confusion as can be inferred from the fact that he does not list V. in litt. First reported under the name A. a single plant was found growing as a weed on a garden bed in Husova 342. (2002).). atroviolaceum from Pouzdřany. distr. according to Kubát et al. — Veronica filiformis. syn. Errouneously reported from South Moravia. canadensis as growing wild from the Terezino údolí valley in the vicinity of Nové Hrady (Velenovský 1877 in Čelakovský 1881). Bromus pumpellianus (Krahulec & Jiřiště 1997) but further studies revealed that it is most probably a hybrid between B. Immigration time of this species requires further study as it probably arrived earlier than usually considered (R.Pyšek et al. only in few botanical gardens. Thousands of saplings have escaped from browsing danger and grow in the surrounding vegetation. pers. canadensis is cultivated very rarely in Europe. persica (syn. 10 plants growing in a water reservoir at the SE margin of the village (2000. Podbořany (2001. where they were first observed in 1973 (M. — Zelkova serrata. — Carex muskingumensis. Louny. Krahulec. — Polygonum aviculare agg. pers. The “true” V. — Bromus pumpellianus × inermis. Presl & Presl (1819) listed V. However. 1989). flexuosa.g.

extinct (if no records have been known for a long period). ore. TYPE OF INVADED HABITAT: natural. hybrids escaped from cultivation are considered “deliberate”. endozoochory. root. medicinal. archaeophyte × archaeophyte. landscaping. biennial. showing species distribution.186 Preslia 74: 97–XX. hemicryptophyte. LIFE FORM: annual. BREEDING SYSTEM: allogamy (protandry. monocarpic perennial. silicula. dye. bee. loment. fodder. neophyte × neophyte. etc. agricultural products. DORMANCY: non-dormant. 2001). SYNONYMS. Mesophyticum. end. geophyte. HABITATS occupied in primary distribution area. andromonoecy. maximum. SR (Grime 1979). INVASIVENESS ELSEWHERE in the world. myrmecochory (dispersal by ants). LATITUDINAL AND LONGITUDINAL RANGE of primary distribution. . morphophysiological (Baskin & Baskin 1999). S. naturalized. rosette. vine. follicle. SEX TYPE: dioecy. protogyny). garden material. TYPE OF INVADED LANDSCAPE: traditional agricultural landscape. polycarpic perennial. semishrub. originated in cultivation. shrub. Invasiveness (features related to the species ecology and behaviour in the Czech Republic) INVASIVE STATUS (sensu Richardson et al. monoecy. climber. nitrogen (Ellenberg et al. soya beans. physiological. neophyte × native. pod. CS. flax. Spontaneously originated hybrids are considered as “accidental”. anemochory (wind). SEXUAL REPRODUCTION IN CR: yes. See text for more details on characteristics concerning species invasiveness in the Czech Republic. pome. despite of it being reported only recently. locally abundant. FAMILY. industrial urban landscape (Hobsbawm 1991). – Structure of the database. schizokarpium. ALTITUDINAL RANGE: minimum. DISPERSAL MODE: autochory. RAUNKIAER SCHEME: therophyte. Biological and ecological characteristics. MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT reached in the Czech Republic. fodder. PLOIDY LEVEL. tree. invasive. textile. III. VECTOR OF ACCIDENTAL INTRODUCTION: grain. SOIL description. epizoochory. 1997). Native distribution. gynomonoecy. FECUNDITY: number of propagules per plant. or both types. FRUIT SIZE: minimum. nut. Species identity and taxonomic position: GENUS. Oreophyticum (Skalický 1988). LOCALITY: only in rare species. important detailed papers. TYPE OF INTRODUCTION into the country: deliberate. rhizome. archaeophyte × native. maximum. no. seed. R. quantitative estimate of the number of localities using the scale of Clement & Foster (1994): 1–4. 50–499. ELLENBERG INDICATOR VALUES: light. rare. neophyte × archaeophyte. FRUIT TYPE: achene. AREA OF ORIGIN: classified into geographical regions according to the system used by Brummitt et al. ABUNDANCE in the wild at the territory of the country: single locality. maximum. considered a neophyte. siliqua. I. DNA CONTENT: taken from Bennett & Leitch (2001). 5–14. database fields are printed in upper case. drupe. HISTORY OF INTRODUCTION: description of the introduction into the country and species invasion history. ORDER. common. capsule. HYBRID TYPE: none. FLOWER COLOUR. geitonogamy. YEAR OF INTRODUCTION: in deliberately introduced taxa (applicable namely for woody plants). wool. temperacture. FLOWERING TIME: start. moisture. PROPAGULE: seed. agriculture (other than food). insect. cotton. CHROMOSOME NUMBER. at least 500 localities. SOURCE OF INFORMATION: floras. NUMBER OF PHYTOGEOGRAPHICAL DISTRICTS from which the species is reported. cleistogamy. 2000): casual. human-made (Chytrý et al. fruit fragment. cultivation relict. botanical. PLANTING PURPOSE: ornamental. CSR. SUBSPECIES. Hybrid between archaeophyte and neophyte must be. MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT reached in primary distribution area. MAPS available. neophyte. gynodioecy. SEED BANK TYPE: I–IV (Thompson et al. oil. Recently found hybrid between two archaeophytes is also considered as an archaeophyte. nanophanerophyte. nutlet. the species could have hybridized since the time of arrival of the later immigrant. LIFE STRATEGY: C. The four main spheres of information are displayed in bold. SPECIES. chamaephyte. PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL UNITS: list of alliances of the Zürich-Montpellier classification system in which the species is found. bird-seed. berry. fruit. phanerophyte. POLLINATION MODE: wind. IV. polygamy. forestry. LIST OF INVADED HABITATS: based on Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1992). scattered. REGION where the occurence is concentrated given that species distribution has a regional pattern. autogamy (facultative. seminatural. obligate). soil reaction. whole plant. food. SEED SIZE: minimum. PROPAGULE WEIGHT. II. 2002 Appendix 2. 1991). post-invasive. (2001). morphological. apogamy. YEAR OF THE FIRST RECORD in the wild. etc. divided into the three basic types: Thermophyticum. rarely. hydrochory (water). CLONALITY TYPE (according to Klimešová & Klimeš 1998). following the same logic. PROPAGULE CHARACTERISTIC: description and special features. RESIDENCE TIME (period of immigration): archaeophyte. accidental. stem. 15–49.