Effects of forest management on bryophyte species richness in Central European forests

Müller, Jörg; Boch, Steffen; Prati, Daniel; Socher, Stephanie A.; Pommer, Ulf; Hessenmöller, Dominik; Schall, Peter; Schulze, Ernst Detlef; Fischer, Markus

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2018.10.019

Cited by 48 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to previous studies reporting a positive effect of disturbances (bryophyte richness: Müller et al., ), no effect (bryophyte and lichen richness: Schall et al., ) or no consistent effect (negative effect on lichen and no effect on bryophyte richness: Paillet et al., ) on species numbers, disturbed plots harbored fewer species than undisturbed plots in this study. These contrasting findings might be on the one hand because disturbance effects vary among regions and ecosystems and on the other hand because effects vary among disturbance types.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast to previous studies reporting a positive effect of disturbances (bryophyte richness: Müller et al, 2019), no effect (bryophyte and lichen richness: Schall et al, 2018) or no consistent effect (negative effect on lichen and no effect on bryophyte richness: tance. This conclusion is in line with many other studies pointing out the conservational value of mature trees and old-growth forest attributes for the conservation of specialist species Gustafsson et al, 2004;Patiño et al, 2009).…”

Section: Disturbance Effects On Bryophyte and Macrolichen Species Rcontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Bryophyte and macrolichen richness per plot is quite high (as we only sampled 4 m 2 of forest floor and 0.64 m 2 of bark surface) compared with other regions (for lichens: Boch, Prati et al., ; Cleavitt, Clyne, & Fahey, ; Nascimbene & Marini, ; for bryophytes: Horvat, Heras, García‐Mijangos, & Biurrun, and Müller et al., ). We did not sample crustose lichen species, but as their richness is often much higher than that of macrolichens and both diversities are positively correlated (Bergamini, Stofer, Bolliger, & Scheidegger, ), we assume that the total lichen richness per plot also would exceed average values of most parts of other European countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…bryophytes : Horvat, Heras, García-Mijangos, &Biurrun, 2017 andMüller et al, 2019). We did not sample crustose lichen species, but as their richness is often much higher than that of macrolichens and both diversities are positively correlated (Bergamini, Stofer, Bolliger, & Scheidegger, 2007), we assume that the total lichen richness per plot also would exceed average values of most parts of other European countries.…”

Section: Boch Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island

Boch

Martins

Ruas

et al. 2019

J Vegetation Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions Studies on bryophyte and lichen diversity patterns along elevational gradients are scarce, although this approach can serve as space‐for‐time substitution to predict diversity changes because of climate warming. Therefore, we investigated bryophytes and macrolichens in disturbed and undisturbed stands along an elevational gradient in the unique laurel forest of Madeira island by addressing the following questions: (a) how does the species richness of functional‐taxonomic bryophyte and macrolichen groups differ with elevation; (b) how is the species richness of these groups affected by disturbances? Location UNESCO World Natural Heritage site laurel forest of Madeira island (Madeira, Portugal). Methods We analyzed species richness of bryophytes and macrolichens in 92 plots in response to elevation and to disturbances. Results Bryophyte species richness showed a mid‐elevational peak, while macrolichen richness increased with elevation. Disturbed plots harbored on average 20% less bryophyte and macrolichen species than undisturbed plots. Conclusions The laurel forest of Madeira island is a bryophyte and lichen diversity hotspot. Our findings indicate future biodiversity threats by changing environmental conditions. This calls for the need for a strict protection status of the laurel forest on Madeira island to minimize human‐related disturbances, for the development of management measures that could mitigate climate change effects by maximizing habitat suitability and for the implementation of species conservation programs to prevent future extinctions, in particular of endemic species.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Disturbance Effects On Bryophyte and Macrolichen Species Rcontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Boch Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island

Boch

Martins

Ruas

et al. 2019

J Vegetation Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The index of forest specialisation ranges between 1 for complete forest specialists and 0 for complete grassland specialists, it is 0.5 for habitat generalists. For lichens, bryophytes and vascular plants we used information from a total of 654, 1816 and 3000 plots, respectively, in forests and grasslands in the same study regions (Boch et al 2013aSocher et al 2013;M€ uller et al 2019).…”

Section: Forest Specialisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Specialisation and diversity of multiple trophic groups are promoted by different forest features

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While forest management strongly influences biodiversity, it remains unclear how the structural and compositional changes caused by management affect different community dimensions (e.g. richness, specialisation, abundance or completeness) and how this differs between taxa. We assessed the effects of nine forest features (representing stand structure, heterogeneity and tree composition) on thirteen above‐ and belowground trophic groups of plants, animals, fungi and bacteria in 150 temperate forest plots differing in their management type. Canopy cover decreased light resources, which increased community specialisation but reduced overall diversity and abundance. Features increasing resource types and diversifying microhabitats (admixing of oaks and conifers) were important and mostly affected richness. Belowground groups responded differently to those aboveground and had weaker responses to most forest features. Our results show that we need to consider forest features rather than broad management types and highlight the importance of considering several groups and community dimensions to better inform conservation.

show abstract

Effects of stand structure and ungulates on understory vegetation in managed and unmanaged forests

Chevaux

Mårell

Baltzinger

et al. 2022

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional conservation policies in Europe notably rely on the passive restoration of natural forest dynamics by setting aside forest areas to preserve forest biodiversity. However, since forest reserves cover only a small proportion of the territory, conservation policies also require complementary conservation efforts in managed forests in order to achieve the biodiversity targets set up in the Convention on Biological Diversity. Conservation measures also raise the question of large herbivore management in and around set‐asides, particularly regarding their impact on understory vegetation. Although many studies have separately analyzed the effects of forest management, management abandonment, and ungulate pressure on forest biodiversity, their joint effects have rarely been studied in a correlative framework. We studied 212 plots located in 15 strict forest reserves paired with adjacent managed forests in European France. We applied structural equation models to test the effects of management abandonment, stand structure, and ungulate pressure on the abundance, species richness, and diversity of herbaceous vascular plants and terricolous bryophytes. We showed that stand structure indices and plot‐level browsing pressure had direct and opposite effects on herbaceous vascular plant species diversity; these effects were linked with the light tolerance of the different species groups. Increasing canopy cover had an overall negative effect on herbaceous vascular plant abundance and species diversity. The effect was two to three times greater in magnitude than the positive effects of browsing pressure on herbaceous plants diversity. On the other hand, a high stand density index had a positive effect on the species richness and diversity of bryophytes, while browsing had no effect. Forest management abandonment had few direct effects on understory plant communities, and mainly indirectly affected herbaceous vascular plant and bryophyte abundance and species richness and diversity through changes in vertical stand structure. Our results show that conservation biologists should rely on foresters and hunters to lead the preservation of understory vegetation communities in managed forests since, respectively, they manipulate stand structure and regulate ungulate pressure. Their management actions should be adapted to the taxa at stake, since bryophytes and vascular plants respond differently to stand and ungulate factors.

show abstract

Effects of forest management on bryophyte species richness in Central European forests

Cited by 48 publications

References 66 publications

Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island

Bryophyte and macrolichen diversity show contrasting elevation relationships and are negatively affected by disturbances in laurel forests of Madeira island

Specialisation and diversity of multiple trophic groups are promoted by different forest features

Effects of stand structure and ungulates on understory vegetation in managed and unmanaged forests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About