Introduction

The apparent decline, both in numbers of populations and in the geographical range, of macrofungi over several decades has aroused widespread concern in Europe. One demonstration of this is the publication of lists of species considered to be in danger of near-future extinction as a result of a complex of environmental changes. These Red Data Lists reflect this concern, both in size and composition of the lists of supposedly endangered species. Several European countries have produced such lists of endangered fungi: Austria (Krisai, 1986); the British Isles (Ing, 1992); Denmark (Vesterholt & Knudsen, 1990); Finland (Rassi et al., 1986); Germany (Benkert, 1982, 1993; Kreisel, 1992; Lettau, 1982; Runge, 1987; Schmitt, 1988; Winterhoff, 1984; Winterhoff & Krieglsteiner, 1984; Wöldecke, 1987); the Netherlands (Arnolds, 1989a); Norway (Bendiksen & Hølland, 1992); Poland (Wojewoda & Ławrinowicz, 1992) and Sweden (Ingelör, Thor & Hallingbäck, 1991). A provisional list for the whole of Europe has been offered by Ing (1993).

National lists differ in character, some reflecting local criteria based on the cultural importance of fungi rather than ecological priorities, and are necessarily parochial.

Composition of Red Lists

Species included in Red Lists are usually associated with ecosystems that are themselves endangered. In general, the majority are found in ancient woodland – both broad-leaved and coniferous, in unimproved grassland, in lowland bogs and sand dunes.