The comparison of the RFI_S results with an expert-based conservation status map shows that the assessment of the habitat quality status provides complementary quantitative information (Fig. 5). Patches that are rated with a favourable conservation status (A) also have the highest mean RFI_S values. Little congruence is found when looking at patches with unfavourable-bad conservation status (C), which have a higher mean RFI_S value than patches with conservation status B. Even though the differences in mean RFI_S values are bigger when using statistical weighting, the general pattern remains consistent, independent of the weighting scheme.