Importance of different tree fractions for epiphytic lichen diversity on<i>Picea abies</i>and<i>Populus tremula</i>in mature managed boreonemoral Swedish forests

Caruso, Alexandro; Thor, Göran

doi:10.1080/02827580701346031

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many epiphytic lichen species are associated with specific substrata, such as trunks or branches (e.g. Holien 1997; Caruso & Thor 2007; Lie et al 2009). Lichen communities also change on trees with height from the ground.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lichens on Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris – from tree bottom to the top

Marmor¹,

Tõrra²,

Saag

et al. 2013

The Lichenologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The vertical gradient of the community structure of epiphytic lichens in forest canopies was studied in southern Estonian coniferous forests. All lichen species on 15 Norway spruces and 15 Scots pines were recorded; age of trees ≥100 years. Species were sampled in height ranges on entire trees from the bottom to the top. The number of lichen species on pine trunks decreased with height from the ground, whereas the number of species on branches increased. There was no significant vertical change in the number of lichen species on spruce trunks; number of species on spruce branches was highest in mid canopy. The mean number of lichen species on a tree was 41 in spruces and 34 in pines; the mean number of species on the first 2 m was 14 in spruces and 12 in pines. According to the results, about two thirds of a tree's lichen species remain unrecorded if only the first 2 m near the ground are surveyed. Many lichen species were found only higher than 2 m, including several common species (e.g. Buellia griseovirens, Lecanora pulicaris, and Melanohalea exasperatula), but also some locally rather rare (Fellhanera subtilis, Micarea nitschkeana, Rinodina efflorescens) or red-listed ones (Evernia mesomorpha, Usnea barbata, U. fulvoreagens, U. substerilis, U. wasmuthii) and one new species for Estonia, Lecanora farinaria. There were also some species, such as Chaenotheca stemonea, Cladonia cenotea and C. norvegica, that were restricted to the lowest 2 m. The results indicate that canopy lichens form a significant part of lichen diversity in coniferous forests, and could add valuable information when estimating forest lichen diversity for conservation and other purposes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lichens on Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris – from tree bottom to the top

Marmor¹,

Tõrra²,

Saag

et al. 2013

The Lichenologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, epiphytic communities are influenced to a great extent by variations in microclimates, both vertically along the trunk and between the different tree fractions (e.g., trunk, branches). These variations are determined by interactions between the regional climate, tree architecture and bark properties (van Halowyn and Lerond 1993;Caruso and Thor 2007). The position of a branch along the tree trunk influences the accumulation of fruticose lichen biomass, which decreases from the top of the tree to the base (Arseneau et al 1998).…”

Section: Do Plants Influence Corticolous Lichen Communities?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lichen-plant interactions

Favero‐Longo

Piervittori

2010

Journal of Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controversial data on the pathways and effects of lichen growth on and near bryophytes and vascular plants are reviewed. In most cases, plants which are used as growth substrates positively influence lichen mineral nutrition and are poorly affected by lichen overgrowth, but several reports of negative relationships, including lichen parasitism and allelopathic interferences, prevent generalizations. The allelopathy of terricolous lichens against neighboring plants has been suggested by in vitro investigations, and a multidirectional phytotoxic mode of action has been shown for lichen secondary metabolites. Recent researches on field settings, instead, offer little support of lichen allelopathy, and plant allelopathy against lichens has so far been neglected. A comparison with lichen-rock interactions indicates that a common set of physical and chemical factors can explain the heterogeneous reciprocal effects that exist between lichens and plants, which depend on the species involved, and highlights gaps that need further studies.

show abstract

“…We know very little about the vertical distribution of epiphytic lichens in mature managed boreal forests, and even less about the vertical distribution of lichens on non-native tree species. This was not possible to assess in this study, but other studies have shown that the lichen species composition in mature forest stands can vary with tree height and that the upper canopy of old trees can host distinctive epiphyte assemblages [ 59 , 60 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Pine Is a Pine and a Spruce Is a Spruce – The Effect of Tree Species and Stand Age on Epiphytic Lichen Communities

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With an increasing demand for forest-based products, there is a growing interest in introducing fast-growing non-native tree species in forest management. Such introductions often have unknown consequences for native forest biodiversity. In this study, we examine epiphytic lichen species richness and species composition on the trunks of non-native Pinus contorta and compare these to the native Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies in managed boreal forests in northern Sweden across a chronosequence of age classes. Overall, we recorded a total of 66,209 lichen occurrences belonging to 57 species in the 96 studied forest stands. We found no difference in species richness of lichens between stands of P. contorta and P. sylvestris, but stands of P. abies had higher total species richness. However, species richness of lichens in stands of P. abies decreased with increasing stand age, while no such age effect was detected for P. contorta and P. sylvestris. Lichen species composition progressively diverged with increasing stand age, and in 30-year-old stands all three tree species showed species-specific assemblages. Epiphytic lichen assemblages in stands of 30-year-old P. contorta were influenced by greater basal area, canopy closure, and average diameter at breast height, P. abies stands by higher branch density and canopy closure, and stands of P. sylvestris by greater bark crevice depth. Differences in lichen species richness and composition were mainly explained by canopy closure and habitat availability, and the greater canopy closure in mature P. abies stands promoted the colonization and growth of calicioid lichen species. Our results indicate that the non-native P. contorta have similar species richness as the native P. sylvestris. The main difference in lichen species richness and composition is between P. abies and Pinus spp. in managed forests of boreal Sweden.

show abstract

Importance of different tree fractions for epiphytic lichen diversity onPicea abiesandPopulus tremulain mature managed boreonemoral Swedish forests

Cited by 18 publications

References 35 publications

Lichens on Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris – from tree bottom to the top

Lichens on Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris – from tree bottom to the top

Lichen-plant interactions

A Pine Is a Pine and a Spruce Is a Spruce – The Effect of Tree Species and Stand Age on Epiphytic Lichen Communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About