2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10021-020-00502-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Historical Disturbances Determine Current Taxonomic, Functional and Phylogenetic Diversity of Saproxylic Beetle Communities in Temperate Primary Forests

Abstract: Disturbance history determines current beetle diversity • Deadwood amount and canopy openness play key roles • Diversity measures respond to different disturbance characteristics • Disturbance effects are diverse across temporal scales

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 93 publications
1
24
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The mismatch between our results and the disturbance-succession theory could be partly explained by both heterogenization and homogenization effects of disturbance by ash-dieback on different aspects of forest structure (Heidrich et al 2020). The relative uniformity of ash plantations makes them more vulnerable to disturbances in comparison to natural forests and the constant propagule pressure (Hietala et al 2018) might represent an intense disturbance that homogenizes some forest structures (Kozák et al 2021;Svoboda et al, 2014). At the same time, other plantation structures might become too heterogeneous which might reduce the availability of some structures and limit certain taxa, as predicted by the hypothesis of area-heterogeneity trade-off (Allouche et al 2012;Heidrich et al 2020).…”
Section: Arthropod Communitycontrasting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The mismatch between our results and the disturbance-succession theory could be partly explained by both heterogenization and homogenization effects of disturbance by ash-dieback on different aspects of forest structure (Heidrich et al 2020). The relative uniformity of ash plantations makes them more vulnerable to disturbances in comparison to natural forests and the constant propagule pressure (Hietala et al 2018) might represent an intense disturbance that homogenizes some forest structures (Kozák et al 2021;Svoboda et al, 2014). At the same time, other plantation structures might become too heterogeneous which might reduce the availability of some structures and limit certain taxa, as predicted by the hypothesis of area-heterogeneity trade-off (Allouche et al 2012;Heidrich et al 2020).…”
Section: Arthropod Communitycontrasting
confidence: 67%
“…However, forests are highly dynamic systems that are often naturally disturbed by windstorms, flooding, fire or insect outbreaks (Swanson et al 2011), from which the forest ecosystems often recover (Senf et al 2019). Forest disturbances are essential for the maintenance of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (Hilmers et al 2018;Thom & Seidl, 2016), but their impact on a forest ecosystem depends on the disturbance type, severity and frequency (Kozák et al 2021;Swanson et al 2011). Therefore, a major concern is to identify whether the effect of an invasive species on forest ecosystems resembles the effects of natural disturbances.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise leaf-chewing caterpillars were slightly promoted by maple decline (Martel and Mauffette, 1997). The accumulation of biological legacies, like perched deadwood or cavities, generally promotes saproxylic organisms following major disturbances (Beudert et al, 2015;Cours et al, 2021;Kozák et al, 2021). This stands true for canopy-dwelling arthropods as the abundance and species richness of saproxylic species is generally enhanced in the canopy of declining stands (Figure 1; Stone et al, 2010;Vincent et al, 2020).…”
Section: Decline-driven Modifications In Canopy Habitats and Cascading Effects On Arthropod Communitiesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…However, saproxylic communities are very complex and are composed of numerous functional groups, which not only allow several key roles in ecosystems, but also respond differently to environmental changes (Johansson et al, 2007;Wetherbee et al, 2020). This makes it difficult to predict how communities are going to respond (Kozák et al, 2021). In this sense, our approach has allowed to detect saproxylic communities more fragile to changes or perturbations, as in the case of Sierra Espadán with lower values of functional redundancy and higher values of functional rarity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%