6 28.7 20.8 7.9 −88.2  Weser 100.4 4.1 2.8 1.3 −95.9  Aue 28.1 7.9 3.8 4.1 −71.9  Helme 575.8 100.3 77.5 22.8 −82.6  Luppe 22.2 3.0 0.5 2.5 −86.5  Nuthe 343.8 48.7 48.0 0.7 −85.8  Mean (±SD) 218.8 (±196.9) 32.1 (±34.5) 25.6 (±28.4) 6.6 (±7.6) −85.2 (±7.2)  Havel 108.8 100.8 32.9 67.9 −7.4 Species-rich mesic meadows  Ems 109.6 8.9 3.2 5.7 −91.9  Weser 45.0 7.1 0.3 6.8 −84.2  Aue 158.6 4.6 0.3 4.3 −97.1  Helme 34.5 12.3 4.0 8.3 −64.3  Luppe 92.6 8.2 2.8 5.4 −91.1  Nuthe 27.2 7.3 0.1 7.2 −73.2  Mean (±SD)

77.9 (±47.0) 8.1 (±2.3) 1.8 (±1.6) 6.3 (±1.3) −83.6 (±11.5)  Havel 71.7 32.8 12.9 19.9 −54.3 Replacement of historical floodplain meadows by other habitat types Landscape conversion was large in all unprotected study areas, with historically-old wet meadows being nowadays present on only 9.1% (±5.5 SD) of their former area, Panobinostat research buy and only 3.1% (±4.3 SD) of species-rich mesic meadows persisting (Table 3). Wet meadows were mainly substituted by species-poor, intensively managed grasslands. In the Ems, Aue and Nuthe areas, 45–60% of the meadows were converted into species-poor grasslands. At the Luppe, most meadows were ICG-001 mw converted to arable fields (47%) followed by the proportion of grasslands

transformed to species-poor, intensively used grasslands (26%). In the Weser area, species-poor grasslands, fallows and arable fields were established, replacing former meadows. At the Helme, a dam was constructed in 1969, resulting in the conversion of much of the meadow area to a lake. The formerly widespread species-rich mesic meadows at the Ems, Weser, Aue and Luppe were largely substituted by arable fields (42–72%), Docetaxel datasheet followed by transformation to species-poor, intensively used meadows. In the Nuthe and Helme areas,

formerly species-rich mesic meadows were to >50% replaced by species-poor meadows. Table 3 Transformation of historical species-rich mesic meadows (MM) and wet meadows (WM) into other land use types (1950/1960s to 2008), and remaining area of historically old meadows (italics) in the seven study areas, expressed as percentage of the area in the 1950/1960s   Species-rich mesic meadows Wet meadows Species-poor, intensively managed grasslands Marshes, fens, watersides and fallows Woodlands and shrublands Arable fields Water-bodies Settlements, industrial areas Original habitat type MM WM MM WM MM WM MM WM MM WM MM WM MM WM MM WM Ems 2.9 2.0 4.2 8.6 36.4 44.4 4.0 7.1 2.1 4.5 49.6 32.3 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.6 Weser 0.6 7.0 2.9 2.8 27.9 18.3 9.3 32.6 3.6 21.5 50.1 16.0 1.5 0.4 4.1 1.4 Aue 0.2 6.5 2.9 13.5 37.9 51.3 6.1 11.7 7.0 13.4 42.8 1.8 0.5 1.4 2.8 0.4 Nuthe 11.6 1.2 9.1 13.5 72.2 59.8 0.5 2.0 1.9 7.7 3.7 14.7 0.9 0.9 0.1 0.2 Luppe 3.0 11.6 0.1 2.1 14.1 26.1 2.8 2.1 7.7 9.6 71.5 46.6 0.5 1.0 0.2 0.8 Helme 0.2 0.8 0.8 14.0 50.7 30.3 10.6 9.5 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 37.0 44.5 0.3 0.4 Mean 3.1 4.8 3.3 9.1 39.9 38.4 5.6 10.8 3.7 9.5 36.3 18.6 6.8 8.2 1.3 0.6 Havel 18.1 11.7 40.1 30.