A Regional Scale Evaluation of Conservation Status of Orchid Species Recorded in The Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey

Abstract

In this study, the threat categories of locally endangered orchid species were sampled over an area of covering 187 km2 in Mersin, Adana, Hatay and Kahramanmaraş provinces of Turkey. Periodic observations were carried out in 44 sampling plots specified within three bioclimatic belts, namely the Mediterranean-montane, the sub-Mediterranean and the Mediterranean. 34 orchid species were identified under the genera of Cephalanthera (L.), Comperia (Steven.), Dactylorhiza, Epipactis (L.), Himantaglossum (Boiss.), Limodorum (L.) Ophrys, Orchisand Serapias (Burm.fil). The results revealed that six orchid species were growing in the Mediterranean-montane zone, 20 species in the sub-Mediterranean zone and 23 species in the Mediterranean zone. According to the resources of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) the threat categories were reported for only 12 out of 13 species. Local threat categories of this study showed some differences when IUCN data were considered. 34 orchid species identified in this study and 12 species were evaluated under Critically Endangered (CR) threat category. It was found that 11, 7, 2 and 2 species were under EN, VU, NT and LC respectively. Therefore, Orchid species sampled from the Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey have been categorized on the basis of the threat categories identified by the IUCN.

Full text

Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology
Available online, ISSN: 2148-127X
www.agrifoodscience.com,
Turkish Science and Technology
A Regional Scale Evaluation of Conservation Status of Orchid Species
Recorded in The Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey
Gülden Sandal Erzurumlu1*, Kemal Tuluhan Yılmaz2, Zerrin Söğüt2
1Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, University of Ömer Halisdemir 51000 Niğde, Turkey
2Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Çukurova, 01330 Adana, Turkey
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Research Article
Received 16 March 2017
Accepted 16 May 2017
In this study, the threat categories of locally endangered orchid species were sampled
over an area of covering 187 km2 in Mersin, Adana, Hatay and Kahramanmaraş
provinces of Turkey. Periodic observations were carried out in 44 sampling plots
specified within three bioclimatic belts, namely the Mediterranean-montane, the sub-
Mediterranean and the Mediterranean. 34 orchid species were identified under the genera
of Cephalanthera (L.), Comperia (Steven.), Dactylorhiza, Epipactis (L.),
Himantaglossum (Boiss.), Limodorum (L.) Ophrys, Orchisand Serapias (Burm.fil). The
results revealed that six orchid species were growing in the Mediterranean-montane zone,
20 species in the sub-Mediterranean zone and 23 species in the Mediterranean zone.
According to the resources of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
the threat categories were reported for only 12 out of 13 species. Local threat categories
of this study showed some differences when IUCN data were considered. 34 orchid
species identified in this study and 12 species were evaluated under Critically Endangered
(CR) threat category. It was found that 11, 7, 2 and 2 species were under EN, VU, NT
and LC respectively. Therefore, Orchid species sampled from the Eastern Mediterranean
Region of Turkey have been categorized on the basis of the threat categories identified by
the IUCN.
Keywords:
Turkey
Eastern Mediterranean
Orchidaceae
IUCN
Threat Categories
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v5i9.999-1001.1233
Introduction
Orchidaceae is the largest and most diverse family of
flowering plants. Although there are various studies on its
taxonomy, it was reported that only 900 genera and 20
000 species were identified within the orchidaceae family
(Horak, 2004).
It was precisely reported that, in Turkey, totally 49 out
of 204 orchid species are hybrid grown and belongs to 23
genera (IUCN, 2008). Seventy-five species found in the
Eastern Mediterranean Region constitute 36.8% of the
total orchid species.
In Turkey, only a few studies have been conducted to
assess the conservation status of plant biodiversity on a
regional scale. These regions included Çukurova Deltas
(The Ceyhan Delta and the Seyhan Delta) located in the
southern coast of Turkey and have a quite high biological
diversity with 600 plant taxa (Çakan et al., 2005).
Kazdağı National Park within the provincial border of
Balikesir, has 21 plant taxa from Orchidaceae family were
reported by the national database. Epipactis pontica
within these taxa was mentioned as an endemic species of
the country.
Several researchers studied Ophrys and Orchis species
from Turkey as well. For example, Yeşilyurt and Akaydın
(2012) carried out study to identify the endemic flora of
Muğla province (Western Mediterranean region of
Turkey). The endemic plant species list of Muğla
province was listed according to the Flora of Turkey.
Most of the Ophrys, Orchis and the endemic species
(namely, Ophry sargolica H.Fleischm. (CR), O. calypsus
M. (CR), O. holoserica (Burm.fil.) (VU), O. homeri M.
(CR), O. labiosa (Kreutz.)(CR), Serapias vomeracea
(CR) were found in the region.
This study aimed to evaluate the threat categories of
the threatened orchids species at both national and
regional scales. In this context, threat factors were
determined through field observations, including
collection of orchid tubers, presence of roads and fields,
transportation, residential and recreational activities, fires.
Materials and Methods
The research area was located in the Eastern
Mediterranean Region between 34048’-37012’ northern
latitudes and 36059’-36019’ eastern longitudes. The area
stands within the provincial borders of the cities of Adana
(Karaisalı, Kadirli, Pozantı, Sarıçam), Hatay (İssume,
Kaşmer), Kahramanmaraş (Başkonuş, Darovası, Tömek,
Uzundağ) and Mersin (Çamlıyayla, Gülnar, Erdemli, Mut,
Silifke, Tarsus), and is located within the C4, C5 and C6
grids of Davis Grid System (Figure 1).
*Corresponding Author:
E-mail: gpeyzaj@mail.com

Erzurumlu et al., / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
997
Figure 1 Research Area
Observation plots were selected considering the
representativeness for the Eastern Mediterranean Region
in terms of orchid species diversity and being dispersed
into different altitude zones. 20 of observation plots were
chosen in this context from the Mediterranean zone (0-
200 m), 18 plots were from the sub-Mediterranean (201-
1300 m), and 6 plots were from the Mediterranean-
montane (1301-1800 m) zones (Sandal, 2009).
To determine the threat categories of the observed
orchid species at a regional scale, threat points obtained
from the averages of the numbers of individuals in the
observation plots were weighted by multiplying by two
considering the fact that the most efficient criterion was
the size of the local population.
Results and Discussion
Some of endemic and non-endemic plant taxa within
the flora of Turkey are under various anthropogenic
pressures, some are experiencing difficulties in sustaining
their generations as a result of these factors. These
anthropogenic factors included industrialization,
urbanization, expansion of agricultural areas, excessive
grazing, tourism, exports, harvesting from the natural
sources for domestic use, reclamation of barren lands,
agricultural practices and chemical contamination,
reforestation and fire.
The status of Turkey's endangered rare and endemic
plants were evaluated on the basis of the threat categories
in the “Red Data Book of Turkish Plants” prepared by
Ekim et al. (2000) according to the IUCN Species
Survival Commission's “IUCN Red List Categories”
version 2.3. In the version 3.1 of the same publication
published later in 2001, the threat categories of rare and
endemic plants were re-evaluated and amended. As a
result of this, sub-categories LR (Lower risk), lc (least
concern) and cd (Conservation dependent) were modified
and subsumed under LC (least concern) and NT (near
threatened). Finally in 2006, the Red Data Book of
Turkish Plants was updated within the context of projects,
“Capacity Building in the Field of Environment for
Turkey” and “Components within the context of the
nature of the Twinning Project”, which were conducted
by the General Directorate of Nature Conservation and
National Parks.
We assumed that the threat conditions of plant species
might be different at local, regional and global scales due
to possible differences in the efficiency of pressure
factors. Therefore, to control the categories defined by the
IUCN at regional and local scales, more research to
delineate the boundaries clearly are needed. It is
reasonable for a species to be assigned to different
categories at the national scale and the regional scale,
depending on its population characteristics and
environmental factors which threat this species. So, the
success of a proposed protection plan for a species
depends on detailed information on the categories of
danger of populations which spread across different
geographic units.
Butler (1986), Rossi (1988) with Kreutz (1998-2009)
were used in the identification of orchid species. Davis
(1984) and Ekim et al. (2000) was used in the
determination of the distribution areas of orchid species in
Turkey. The threat categories of plant taxa were
determined by scanning resources related to the IUCN
Red List categories and the Criteria Version 3.1. Those
newly recorded for C5 grid were marked with (*) in Table
1. Davis (1984) volume eight was used to determine new
records of taxa.
 The existence ratios of the orchid species detected in
the 44 observation plots were sorted and ranked
according to the following scale.
 The average of the number of individuals belonging
to the orchid species recorded in the observation plots
in the three-year period were evaluated according to
the scale given below.
 Turkey was divided into 27 grid squares according to
Davis (1984) grid system. The existence ratios of the
orchid species recorded in the research area were
evaluated according to the limits specified below by
calculating their distributions in Turkey.
 Three points were given if the plant species is only
seen in solely one bio-climatic belt according to the
distribution of species along bio-climatic zonation. 2
points were given if it is seen in 2 and finally 1 point
was given if it is seen in 3 belts.
 Considering the state of orchid species of being
endemic, 0 threat point was given to the non-endemic
orchid species, while 1 point was awarded to the
species endemic to Turkey
The main floristic components within the boundaries
of the study area are: Cephalantherakurdica Bornm, C.
longifolia, C. rubra L., Comperiacomperiana,
Dactylorhizaiberica (Willd.), D. osmanica,
Epipactishelleborine, Himantaglossum affine,
Limodorumabortivum, Ophrysapifera, O. bornmuelleri
M. Schulze ,O. cilicica Schlechter, O. ferrum-equinum
Desf., O. fusca Link., O. holoserica, O. isaura Renz &
Taubenheim, O. lutea Cav., O. mammosa Desf., O.
reinholdii H. Fleischm, O. umbilicata Desf., O. vernixia
Brot., Orchis anatolica Boiss., O. collina
Banks&Solander, O. coriophora L., O. italica Poiret., O.
laxiflora Lam., O. mascula L., O. palustris Laco., O.
papilionaceae L., O. punctulata Lindley., O.simia Lam.,
O. spitzeli Koch., O. tridentata Scop. and Serapias
vomeracea. The data reported by Yılmaz (2001) were
used for the classification of bio-climatic zonesas one of
the evaluation criteria for the threat categories.

Erzurumlu et al., / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
998
The number of individuals for each orchid species in
the observation plots was recorded periodically during
three years. The species assigned to the threat categories
in the IUCN sources (CR, EN, VU, NT, LC) were
determined. Five criteria were developed for the
determination of regional scaled threat categories for
orchid species recorded in the observation plots. These
criteria are the rate (frequency) of existence in the entire
research area, the average number of individuals in the
plots, geographical distribution in Turkey, distribution in
bioclimatic zones and the status of endemism. These
criteria were evaluated with a scoring system taken into
account the determined limits as presented below, and
corresponding values and limits were summarized in
Table 1.
The threat points for the recorded orchid species were
calculated according to the five evaluation criteria
explained in the method section and were given in Table
2. According to these scores, the threat categories at a
regional scale were proposed and compared with current
IUCN categories.
Table 1 The values and limits of threat rating, existence ratios, occurrence in 27 grid squares of Turkey, and average
number of individuals used in the study*
Threat rating
Existence ratio (%)
Occurrence in Turkey in 27 Grid squares
Average Number of Individuals
1
36-44%
22-27
61-87
2
26-35%
15-21
36-60
3
13-25%
8-14
16-35
4
1-12%
1-7
1-15
*Source: authors, extracted from survey data.
Table 2 Comparison of the regional threat categories, assigned according to the threat ratings, with current IUCN threat
categories of recorded orchid species
Sequence
number
Taxa
The criteria and threat points
Total
IUCN
category
Suggested
category
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
1
Cephalanthera kurdica
3
6
4
2
0
15
VU
VU
2
Cephalanthera longifolia
3
8
4
3
0
18
EN
EN
3
Cephalanthera rubra
4
8
4
3
0
19
CR
CR
4
Comperia comperiana
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
5
Dactylorhiza iberica Willd.
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
6
Dactylorhiza osmanica
3
8
3
1
1
16
-
VU
7
Epipactis helleborine
4
6
4
2
0
16
EN
VU
8
Himantaglossum affine
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
9
Limodorum abortivum
4
6
4
3
0
17
VU
EN
10
Ophrys apifera
4
6
4
3
0
17
VU
EN
11
Ophrys bornmuelleri
2
6
4
2
0
14
LR
NT
12
Ophrys cilicica
4
8
4
2
0
18
-
EN
13
Ophrys ferrum-equinum
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
14
Ophrys fusca
4
6
4
3
0
17
-
EN
15
Ophrys isaura*
3
2
1
2
1
9
EN
LC
16
Ophrys holoserica
4
8
4
3
0
19
VU
CR
17
Ophrys mammosa
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
18
Ophrys reinholdii
4
8
4
3
0
19
VU
CR
19
Ophrys umbilicata
3
6
4
2
0
15
-
VU
20
Orchis italica
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
21
Orchis collina
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
22
Orchis coriophora L.
4
8
4
2
0
18
-
EN
23
Orchis anatolica
1
2
4
1
0
8
-
LC
24
Orchis laxiflora
4
6
4
3
0
17
-
EN
25
Ophrys lutea
4
6
4
2
0
16
EN
VU
26
Orchis mascula
4
6
4
3
0
17
-
EN
27
Orchis simia
4
8
4
3
0
19
VU
CR
28
Orchis spitzeli
4
8
4
3
0
19
-
CR
29
Orchis palustris
4
4
4
2
0
14
-
NT
30
Orchis papilionaceae
4
8
1
3
0
16
-
VU
31
Orchis punctulata
4
8
4
2
0
18
-
EN
32
Orchis tridentata
4
8
4
2
0
18
-
EN
33
Ophrys vernixia*
3
6
4
2
0
15
-
VU
34
Serapias vomeracea
4
6
4
3
0
17
-
EN
VU: Vulnerable, CR:Critically Endangered, EN:Endangered, NT:Near Threatened, LC:Least Concern, LR:Lower Risk

Erzurumlu et al., / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
999
Whilst 34 orchid species determined in the research
according to the IUCN resources, the threat categories
were reported only for 12 species. When the categories
given according to the IUCN resources are taken into
consideration, threat categories at regional scale
determined in this study showed differences. Limodorum
abortivum, Ophrys apifera, O. holoserica, O. reinholdii
and O. simia were evaluated under higher categories,
Epipactis helleborine, Ophrys isaura, O. bornmuelleri
and O. lutea were evaluated under lower ones while
Cephalanthera rubra, C. Longifolia and C. kurdica were
evaluated under equivalent categories.
According to the findings of this study, Cephalanthera
rubra has the highest priority amongst all the species that
should be conserved at the regional scale with the highest
score, CR (19 points) as stated in the IUCN. Thus, this
species was assigned to the same category. Ophrys
holoserica, O. reinholdii and Orchis simia were assigned
to the highly vulnerable CR category with the score of 19
while they were in the vulnerable category (VU) in the
IUCN. Ophrys holoserica included in the vulnarable (VU)
category in the “Red Book of the Plants of Turkey” was
identified only in the three plots of the experimental plots
(Kahramanmaraş-Tömek, Uzundağ Kabakyeri, Mut-
Kayrak). Orchis papilionaceae fell into the VU category
as it was in the study conducted by Vukovic et al. (2011).
Such functional use of plants led to the development
of ornamental plants market, which finally has reached a
point which is economically significant. In 145 countries
around the world, the cultivation of ornamental plants is
carried out on a total area of 220,000 ha, and the trade
volume of ornamental plants is around $50 billion USD.
Orchids are the most important flowers in this market. For
this, most of the orchid species are collected from nature.
For protecting the natural populations of rare and endemic
plant species, the determination of natural populations,
recordings and propagations are very important (Guney et
al., 2016).
Ljubičić (2006) studied the rare and threatened
vascular plants of the island of Pag according to 1994 and
2005 Red Books. Based on 2005 Red Book, the flora of
the island of Pag includes 33 threatened taxa (species and
subspecies). Eight of them are critically endangered (CR),
seven are in the endangered category (EN) and 18 taxa
belong to the vulnerable category (VU). Orchid species
and categories were recorded as follows, Ophrys
bertolonii Moretti (VU), O. fuciflora Haller (VU), O.
sphegodes Mill. (VU), Orchis coriophora L. (VU), Orchis
provincialis Balb.(VU), Orchis purpurea Huds. E (VU),
Orchis simia Lam. (VU), Orchis tridentata Scop. (VU).
Cephalanthera longifolia, is in the category of EN and
as a-protected species by the IUCN, and it was assigned
to the same category after being evaluated in the category
of species in need protection with 17 points (IUCN,
2011). Jalal (2012), reported that it has been found widely
in Himalayas.
Ophrys apifera, is in the LC category in the IUCN
while it is in the EN category according to Vukovic et
al.(2011) in parallel to this research. Orchis coriophora is
in the EN category according to this research while it is
not included in the threat categories of the IUCN. This
species is in the VU category according to the research of
Vukovic et al. (2011).
While Epipactis helleborine was in the category of EN
in the IUCN, it was assigned to the vulnerable category
having received 16 points following to our regional
research findings. This species was found in different
categories in various resources for example, in CR
category in England (IUCN, 2011), in LC category in
Britain (IUCN, 2005) and widely found category on
Himalayas according to (Jalal, 2012).
While Limodorum abortivum was in the category of
vulnarable (VU) in the IUCN, it was assigned to the
category of EN with 17 points according to our
evaluation.
Ophrys isaura, an endemic orchid species to Turkey,
was assigned to the LC category having received 9 points
while it was in EN category according to the IUCN; it is
reported that only in the C4 grid and endemic to Turkey.
According to the results of this research, this species was
recorded in C5 square and can be considered as a new
record. Recorded localities are; the west of Menekşe
village, the cemetery of Cukurova University, Çamlıyayla
(Kaburgediği), Horticultural Research Institute of
Erdemli, in Gülnar (Kocaoluk Kardak and Çifteli
locations) and in Karaisalı regions (Kelköy cemetery)
which fall into the sub-Mediterranean and Mediterranean
climatic zone.
Ophrys isaura was found in 11 plots and was
considered to be abundant in terms of its number of
individuals. This event led the threat assessment to be
lowered down. Thus, it is understood that the distribution
area of this species in Turkey is possibly wider. On the
other hand, the other species Ophrys vernixia, which is a
new record for the province of Adana, was assigned to the
category VU.
While Ophrys bornmuelleri was in the category of LR
in the IUCN, it was assigned to the NT category since it
has received 14 points in our research. This species was
found widely distributed in the research area. While
Orchis simia was in the category of VU in the IUCN, it
was assigned to the CR category with 19 points according
to our study.
The most widespread two species in our study area are
Orchis isaura and Ophrys anatolica. The IUCN has not
reported any information on Ophrys anatolica. It was
evaluated in LC category because of 8 points assigned to
it. It was found in 15 grids in Turkey (A2, A3, A5, B1,
B2, B8, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C9), while was
found only in three grids in our study, in Çamlıyayla
(Kaburgediği), Erdemli (Alata Horticultural Research
Institute), Gülnar (Çifteli location, KocaolukKardak
location), İskenderun (Kaşmer village), Kadirli
(KaratepeAslantaş National Park), Kahramanmaraş
(Kabakyeri-Uzundağ location), Mut (Sand Quarry,
Kayrak Village,Taşlı hill), Niğde (Karagümüş 1-2),
Pozantı (Gülek Strait)), Silifke (Göksu Delta) and Tarsus
(Muhat village, Sağlıklı village, cemetery of Sucular
village). It grows in the Mediterranean-montane, the sub
Mediterranean and the Mediterranean climate zones.

Erzurumlu et al., / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
1000
Comperia comperiana, Dactylorhiza iberica,
Himantaglossum affine, Ophrys ferrum-equinum, O.
mammosa, Orchis collina, O. italica and O. spitzeli were
rarely found in the observation plots. The IUCN did not
report any threat category for these species. These species
were assigned to the CR category with 19 points that they
received in the study. Cephalanthera kurdica was
determined to be in the VU category as noted by the
IUCN.
It was demonstrated that six orchid species grow in
the Mediterranean-mountain belt, 20 in the sub-
Mediterranean belt and 23 in the Mediterranean belt. The
number of orchid species growing in the Mediterranean-
Montane Belt is much lesser than the other belts and only
one unique species (Orchis punctulata) has been
determined to be growing in this belt. 34 species of orchid
determined by this study were regionally evaluated in the
categories of CR (12 species), EN (11 species), VU (7
species), NT (2 species) and LC (2 species).
This study was conducted in 44 observation plots in
the Eastern Mediterranean region. It was assumed that the
number of individuals is the most important factor in
terms of presenting data on the population. Although the
data, being limited to the 44 plots restricted to the
research area, prevent us from making some
generalizations; recommendations were presented to
allow re-determination of conservation status of the
species identified within the boundaries of our research
area. The average number of individuals in the plots
chosen within the research area provided a comparative
approach regarding the population among the taxa.
In the light of all these evaluations, it is believed that
there is a need for insitu protective measures for some
species. These species are Cephalanthera rubra,
Comperia comperiana, Dactylorhiza iberica,
Himantaglossum affine, Ophrys ferrum-equinum, Ophrys
holoserica, Ophrys mammosa, Ophrys reinholdii, Orchis
collina, Orchis italica, O. simia and O. spitzeli. A few
numbers of individuals of these identified orchid species
is thought to be an indicator of destruction factors such as
collection, while it might have sourced from reproductive
physiology as well.
Considering the research results, it seems that the total
of species in categories CR, EN and VU (21) are higher
than that of the other two belts. Plant species in these
categories were determined to be 18 in the Sub-
Mediterranean belt, while only five were determined in
the Mediterranean-Montane Belt. However, when species
with limited distribution in only one climate belt are
concerned, the Mediterranean zone in capsulated 11
species in total, including CR, EN and VU categories
being six, four and one, respectively. On the contrary, no
species, assigned to one of these categories and
distributed in the Mediterranean-Montane Belt, were
determined while only the species that was included in
five CR categories existed in Sub-Mediterranean Belt.
This proves the argument that there is a high-level
threat factor on the orchid species in the Mediterranean
zone, which is considered to be dominant starting from
the sea-level and reaching up to 250 m (ASL) due to
extensive use due to accessibility. Necessary measures
should be taken against these threat factors to prevent
these species to be assigned to the category of CR and to
fall into EX status.
Conclusion
The aim of landscape architecture is to provide an
inhabitable environment. Landscape architects have
carried out studies from the past to present for the
environmental conformity and objective for the design of
all spaces. Meanwhile, the design studies of landscape
architects should be sustainable (Güngör, 2017).
It could be argued that environmental factors are quite
influential on the grow of the orchid species which are
almost naturally found in every region in Turkey. It was
also determined that species included in various threat
categories are under dense threat due to anthropogenic
effects and only a limited number of species are well-
distributed and profoundly existed in groups. The
categories of these species at regional scale were
proposed to be lower with respect to the categories
determined by the IUCN. Distribution area of the species
in the region should be determined more accurately. The
threat categories of species should be evaluated
periodically. Locals engaged in collecting the plant should
be well-trained. Training should be provided and
supported with visual and printed publications and only
skilled people should train the trainees to achieve and
increase the public awareness and participation to the bio-
diversity conservation.
References
Butler KP, 1986. Orchideen. Die Wirldwachsenden Arten und
Unterarten Europas, Vorderasiens und Nordafrikas.
Gesamtherstellung Mohndruck Graphische Betriebe Gmbh,
Gütersloh, Germany. 287p.
Çakan H, Yılmaz KT, Düzenli A 2005. First Comprehensive
Assessment of the Conservation Status of the Flora of Çukurova
Deltas, Southern Turkey. Oryx Vol 39 (1): 17-21.
Çetin M, 2016. Peyzaj Planlamada Biyoklimatik Konfor Alanların
Belirlenmesi: Cide Kıyı Şeridi Örneği. Türk Tarım – Gıda Bilim
ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 4(9): 800-804, 2016
Davis PH, 1984. Flora of Turkey and The East Aegean Islands.
Edingburg University Pres. Vol: 8.
Ekim T, Koyuncu M, Vural M, Duman H, Aytaç Z, Adıgüzel N,
2000.Türkiye Bitkileri Kırmızı Kitabı (Eğrelti ve Tohumlu
Bitkiler). Red Data Book of Turkish Plants. Ankara. S.246.
Guney K, Cetin M, Sevik H, Guney KB. 2016. Effects of Some
Hormone Applications on Germination and Morphological
Characters of Endangered Plant Species Lilium artvinense L.
Seeds, New Challenges in Seed Biology - Basic and
Translational Research Driving Seed Technology, Dr. Susana
Araújo (Ed.), InTech, Chapter 4: 97-112
Güngör S. 2017. The Examination of Environmental Design
Principles in Public Institutions in the Example of the Current
Landscape Design of Konya Courthouse. Turkish Journal of
Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(2): 176-181,
2017.
Horak D. 2004 Orchid sand How They Grow. Brooklyn Botanic
Garden. http://www.bbg.org
IUCN. 2005 IUCN SSC Red List Programme Committee.
Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at
Regional Levels, Available at: www.iucn.org/webfiles/
doc/SSC/RedList/pdf (on 30th of June, 2015).

Erzurumlu et al., / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 5(9): 996-1001, 2017
1001
IUCN. 2008. Red List of Threatened Species. SSC African Rhino
Specialist Group.
IUCN. 2011 www.arkive.org. IUCN RedList.
http://www.iucnredlist.org
Jalal JS. 2012 Status, threats and conservation strategies for orchids
of western Himalaya, India. 4(15): 3401–3409.
Kreutz CAJ. 1998 Die Orchideen der Türkei (Beschreibung,
Ökologie, Verbreitung, Gefährdung, Schutz). Cip-Gegevens
Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag. Netherlands. 766 P
Ljubičić L, Britvec M 2006. Rare And Threatened Plants of The
Island of Pag Agronomskı Glasnık 1/2006.
Rossi W. 1988. Orchids. Simon & Schuster Inc. Rockefeller
Center.1230 Avenue of the Americas. New York. 255p.
Sandal G. 2009. Doğu Akdeniz Bölgesi’nde Doğal Salep Türlerinin
Saptanması ve Mikorizaların Belirlenmesi Üzerine
Araştırmalar. Ç.Ü. Peyzaj Mim. Böl. Doktora Tezi.
Vukovic N, Brana S, Mitic B. 2011. Orchid diversity of the cape of
Kamenjak (Istria, Croatia). Acta Bot. Croat. 70 (1): 23–40p.
Yeşilyurt EB, Akaydın G. 2012. Endemic plants and their threat
categories of Muğla province (Turkey). Hacettepe
J.Biol&Chem, 40 (2): 195-212
Yılmaz KT. 2001. Akdeniz Doğal Bitki Örtüsü. Ç.Ü. Zir. Fak.
Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü. Ç.Ü.Z.F.Genel Yayın No:141. Ders
Kitapları Yayın No: B-13 Adana. 179 S.