590 A. ‐T. Valli et al.


TABLE 1 Geographical data for the subpopulations of Limonium korakonisicum, Limonium phitosianum and Limonium zacynthium, with area of occupancy (AOO) and number of individuals sampled for genetic analyses.


Subpopulation (by species)


L. korakonisicum


L. phitosianum Lp1 Lp2 Lp3 Lp4 Lp5 Lp6 Lp7


Lp8 Lp9


Lp10 Lp11 Lp12 Lp13 Lp14 Total


L. zacynthium Lz1 Lz2 Lz3 Lz4 Lz5


Total The duration of flowering and fruiting across all species


and subpopulations was monitored at intervals of 1–2 weeks over the 5 consecutive years. Correlation of the duration of flowering/fruiting with mean annual temperature, max- imum and minimum temperatures, and precipitation was examined with stepwise multiple linear regression analysis. Meteorological data were obtained from the Hellenic National Meteorological Service. Comparisons of repro- ductive data were assessed using One Way ANOVA, and differences among pairs of means were validated using Tukey’s Method in Statistica 8.0 (StatSoft, Germany).


Population viability analysis and conservation status assessment


We conducted a population viability analysis in RAMAS Ecolab 2 (Rexstad et al., 2000), using the simple, unstruc- tured population model. Initial abundance was based on population size in the first year, and seedling survival rate was used as the survival rate. Population growth rate (R), re- flecting population size interannual variation (N(t + 1)/Nt), where N is number of individuals in year t, was character- ized by mean and SD values, accounting for environmental stochasticity.Weused the demographic stochasticity option facilitating the consideration of variations in annual


Korakonisi Korithi


Megalo nisi Mikro nisi


Aghios Petros Xigia


Makris Gialos


Aghios Nikolaos (Vasilikos) Porto Roma Marathias Korakonisi


Porto Limnionas—Roxa Porto Vromi Plakaki Stenitis


Marathias


Marathonisi Pelouzo


Porto Limnionas-Roxa Porto Roma


7–20 6–27


2–14 1–12


1–812–19 0–5


70–80 18 20


15–20 12–27


1–918–21 3–13


2–19


3–99–16 2–75–16 8–18 7–15 2–7


10–12 10


16–21 14–21 15


40–70 20–40


1–520–30 1–750–80 1–970–90 50–70 20–40


12 9–10


20.730061° 37.717237° 4 20.700863° 37.932599° 4


20.708932° 37.910338° 4 20.721823° 37.882508° 4 20.733364° 37.872918° 4 20.737938° 37.864306° 4 20.724814° 37.879654° 4 20.991782° 37.728830° 4


20.990928° 37.710977° 4 20.845326° 37.677607° 8 20.729977° 37.717501° 4 20.701308° 37.739396° 4 20.633498° 37.822426° 4 20.770373° 37.684366° 4 20.639588° 37.810444° 4 60


20.845198° 37.678225° 12 20.866335° 37.685619° 4 20.944736° 37.705409° 4 20.700092° 37.739530° 4 20.992023° 37.712677° 4 28


10 Location


Altitude (m)


Slope (°) Longitude Latitude


AOO (km2)


No. of sampled individuals


10 9


8


10 9


recruitment, growth and mortality rates, even under stable environmental conditions. The model assumed den- sity-independent, exponential population growth until reaching ceiling K, at which point the growth rate abruptly reduced to 1.0 (Akçakaya et al., 1999) because of uncertain- ties regarding density dependence in the three Limonium species. Projections were to 10 and 50 years from 2018, and simulations ran with 1,000 replications, with 95% confidence intervals based on the Kolmogorov–Smirnov dispersion test (Sokal & Rohlf, 1981). For L. phitosianum and L. zacynthium, analyses were conducted for both total populations and individual subpopulations. Conservation assessment followed IUCN (2022a).


Threats


Any direct threats to the habitats and/or individuals of the three species and any stresses they cause to the species were recorded in situ and classified according to IUCN (2022b).


Genetic analyses of the diploid Limonium species


We sampled a total of 56 individuals from three subpopula- tions of L. zacynthium and three subpopulations of L. phi- tosianum in September 2021 (Table 1). Fresh leaf material


Oryx, 2024, 58(5), 587–599 © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605324000140


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140