Linking forest management and biodiversity indicators to strengthen sustainable forest management in Europe

The identification and analysis of ecological guilds have been fundamental to understand the processes thatdetermine the structure and organization of communities. However, reviewing studies that have tried to categorizespecies into trophic guilds we found many different criteria on which such categorizations are based; consequently, asingle species may have several guild designations, limiting its accuracy and applicability. In this paper we proposea classification scheme for trophic guilds as a first step to establish a common terminology. For this purpose weconsidered 1502 species of mainland birds and mammals from North America (Mexico, USA, and Canada).

http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmbiodiv/v85n3/v85n3a22.pdf

A hierarchical classification of trophic guilds for North American birds and mammals

Including biodiversity assessments in forest management planning is becoming increasingly important due to the importance of biodiversity for forest ecosystem resilience provision and sustainable functioning. Here we investigated the potential to include biodiversity indicators into forest management planning in Europe. In particular, we aimed to (i) identify biodiversity indicators and data collection methods for biodiversity assessments at the stand and landscape levels, and (ii) evaluate the practicality of those indicators for forest management planning. We performed a literature review in which we screened 188 research studies published between 1990 and 2020. We selected 94 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and examined in more detail. We considered three aspects of biodiversity: structure, composition, and function, and four forest management categories: unmanaged, managed, plantation, and silvopastoral. We used three criteria to evaluate the practicality of forest biodiversity indicators: cost-effectiveness, ease of application, and time-effectiveness. We identified differences in the practicality of biodiversity indicators for their incorporation into management plans. Stand-level indicators are more practical than landscape-level indicators. Moreover, structural biodiversity indicators (e.g., large trees, canopy openness, and old forest stands) are more useful in management plans than compositional indicators, as these are easily observable by non-professionals and can be obtained by forest inventories. Compositional indicators such are vascular plants, fungi, bryophyte, lichens, and invertebrate species are hard to identify by non-professionals and thus are impractical. Functional indicators (e.g., nutrient cycling) are not sufficiently addressed in the literature. Using recently updated existing databases (e.g., national forest inventories and bird atlases) is very time and cost-efficient. Remote sensing and other technology (e.g., smartphone applications) are promising for efficient data collection in the future. However, more research is needed to make these tools more accurate and applicable to a variety of ecological conditions and scales. Until then, forest stand structural variables derived from inventories can help improve management plans to prepare European forests towards an uncertain future.

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/3/343/pdf

Stand Structural Characteristics Are the Most Practical Biodiversity Indicators for Forest Management Planning in Europe

How much, why and where? Deadwood in forest ecosystems: The case of Poland

Which population density affects home ranges of co-occurring rodents?

Effects of forest management on bird assemblages in oak-dominated stands of the Western Carpathians – Refuges for rare species

The paper aims to answer the question whether differences exist in microhabitat preferences of the yellow-necked mouse and the bank vole between the natural forest and close-to-nature managed forest in the phase of stand regeneration. The two species were live-trapped during two periods in 2006 and 2007 on a square trapping grid established in a managed forest and a natural one. Ten microhabitat variables of each trapping point were measured to analyse their influence on the spatial distribution of the two species. At trapping points, the number of capture records for each species as a dependent variable was modelled using Generalised Linear Models. The herbal cover and a distance to the nearest woody debris were the most important measured microhabitat variables which affect the spatial distribution of both species. In the natural forest, the number of captures in both species increased significantly (p < 0.05) with a decreasing number of trees, increasing undergrowth coverage and decreasing distance to the nearest woody debris. In the managed forest, an increasing distance to the nearest tree and increasing herbal cover had a negative effect on the yellow-necked mouse occurrence (p < 0.001), while in contrast, the increase in values of the same variables increased frequency of occurrence of the bank vole (p < 0.001). Moreover, the bank vole was more frequent in the presence of woody debris (p < 0.002). The study demonstrated clearly that these species modify their spatial activity depending on the management of the woodland.

/pdf/response-of-the-dominant-rodent-species-to-close-to-nature-112kugm75w.pdf

Response of the dominant rodent species to close-to-nature logging practices in a temperate mixed forest

The study of foraging behaviour of 20 forest bird species was conducted during two different phenophases of a vegetation period in the West Carpathians oak-dominated natural forests. Using a standard and a modified a priori approaches, seven foraging guilds were distinguished, whereas only five significantly different guilds were clustered by a a posteriori approach. Four common guilds for all three approaches were quantitatively compared. The methods differed especially in the classification of foraging generalists. Differences in guild densities between a priori and a posteriori approaches emerged in both, the pre-foliage and the foliage periods, chiefly in the guilds of insectivores on ground surface (47.3-89.6%) and insectivores on buds/leaves and twigs (15.0-45.9%). The modified a priori method provided moderate densities of separate guilds. The modified a priori method with more detailed density calculation is recommended for the quantitative guild structure comparisons of different bird assemblages. The method takes into consideration proportional use of foraging substrates in combination with food type.

A comparison of three different approaches for the classification of bird foraging guilds : an effect of leaf phenophase

The data collected during nine vegetation seasons were analysed to reveal abundance of the common shrew in fir-beech forests of the Kremnicke vrchy Mts. (Western Carpathians, central Slovakia). Live trapping in three quadratic study plots and five lines representing different age categories of fir-beech and beech forests was carried out using wooden live traps and pitfalls. A very low abundance of the common shrew was found. During the whole period, the absolute overall trapping efficiency of the species comprised only 0.07% and mean density 0.08–0.52 ind./ha. The analysis revealed significant differences in neither trapping efficiency nor density among the study plots. Pitfalls and Chmela live traps reached similar values of the trapping efficiency (0.06 vs. 0.07%). The regression model showed a significant relationship (r = 0.55, p < 0.05) between the number of trap nights and the number of trapped individuals of the common shrew, but the overall number of trapped individuals remained very low also on the level of high trapping intensity. Some causes of the very low abundance of the common shrew were discussed; the fact remains a real rarity of the species in the given area and time.

Is the common shrew ( Sorex araneus ) really a common forest species

The vertical form of the common ivy Hedera helix L. is associated with diverse and semi-natural forests in Central European highlands

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Peter Lešo

Author Tools

Chat about Author