Дополнительные файлы [RJEE Vol. 3 (4). 2018 – 2]

• Fig. 1. Map of the intact forest landscapes in the boreal
• Fig. 2. Means and standard deviations of the coverage
• Fig. 3. NMDS ordination of the vegetation plots sampled А
• Fig. 3. NMDS ordination of the vegetation plots sampled В
• Fig. 4. Ranges and mean ecological values of the forest types
• Fig. 5. Proportion of species of different ecological-coenotic groups
• Fig. 6. Piceeta (Abieta) fruticoso-hylocomiosa in the plain part of the Komi Republic  left
• Fig. 6. Piceeta (Abieta) fruticoso-hylocomiosa in the plain part of the Komi Republic  right
• Fig. 7. Soil profiles (a — Podzol and b — Albeluvisol) in the Piceeta-Abieta fruticoso-hylocomiosa A
• Fig. 7. Soil profiles (a — Podzol and b — Albeluvisol) in the Piceeta-Abieta fruticoso-hylocomiosa B
• Fig. 8. Piceeta parviherboso-hylocomiosa in the upper reaches of the Vashka River
• Fig. 9. Piceeto-Abieta nemoralo-borealiherbosa in the upper reaches of the Suran River  A
• Fig. 9. Piceeto-Abieta nemoralo-borealiherbosa in the upper reaches of the Suran River  B
• Fig. 10. Piceeto-Abieta magnofilicosum with Dryopteris dilatata in the 5th
• Fig. 11. Piceeto-Abieta magnoherbosa with Athyrium filix-femina
• Fig. 12. Piceeto-Abieta nitrophilo-magnoherbosa in the Suran River
• Fig. 13. Soil profiles (a — Dystric Fluvisol and b — Gleysol) in the Piceeta A
• Fig. 13. Soil profiles (a — Dystric Fluvisol and b — Gleysol) in the Piceeta B
• Fig. 14. Boxplots of the coverage of deadwoods at different stages of their