1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1127(98)00398-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wood-decomposing fungi and seed-tree cutting: A 40-year perspective

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
65
2
4

Year Published

2003
2003
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 116 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
8
65
2
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast to other studies that have reported declines in (Dahlberg et al, 2001;Twieg et al, 2007), or no effect on (Jones et al 2003), EcM fungi after clearcut logging, we found a significant increase in the relative richness and evenness of fungal fingerprints in response to clearcut logging, possibly driven by changes in saprotrophic fungi. The removal of trees by logging causes changes in substrate input to the forest floor and, depending on the distribution of woody debris, the diversity of saprotrophic fungi may be affected (Sippola and Renvall, 1999). We found that low-severity burning changed fungal community structure and increased the evenness, but had no effect on the relative richness of fungal fingerprints, a result consistent with findings from other studies (Jonsson et al, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…In contrast to other studies that have reported declines in (Dahlberg et al, 2001;Twieg et al, 2007), or no effect on (Jones et al 2003), EcM fungi after clearcut logging, we found a significant increase in the relative richness and evenness of fungal fingerprints in response to clearcut logging, possibly driven by changes in saprotrophic fungi. The removal of trees by logging causes changes in substrate input to the forest floor and, depending on the distribution of woody debris, the diversity of saprotrophic fungi may be affected (Sippola and Renvall, 1999). We found that low-severity burning changed fungal community structure and increased the evenness, but had no effect on the relative richness of fungal fingerprints, a result consistent with findings from other studies (Jonsson et al, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…It is one of the most relevant components of forest biodiversity, and it represents an important forest carbon pool (Stokland et al 2004, Woodall et al 2009). Dead trees, stumps, and fine and coarse woody debris (CWD) are essential to forest ecosystem dynamics by providing food and habitat for taxa such as fungi, arthropods, birds, insects, and epiphytic lichens (Sippola and Renvall 1999, Bowman et al 2000, Ferris et al 2000, Siitonen et al 2000, Similä et al 2003, Jonsson et al 2005, Odor et al 2006, Londsale et al 2008, Winter and Möller 2008. Approximately 20 -25% of forest species depend on decaying wood (Boddy 2001, Siitonen 2001, although decayed material is often viewed as a limited habitat resource for some organisms (Hagen and Grove 1999).…”
Section: Eadwood Is Acknowledged To Be a Criticalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a consequence of their high structural heterogeneity levels, they provide special habitats and trophic niches necessary for the existence and development of many species, such as birds, invertebrates, lichens, bryophytes and particularly saproxylic fungi (Harmon et al 1986, Sippola & Renvall 1999, Heilmann-Clausen 2001, Siitonen 2001, Humphrey et al 2002, Jansson & AndrĂ©n 2003, NordĂ©n et al 2007, Kraus & Krumm 2013. In this sense, forest ecosystems with a high degree of naturalness could provide a reference for implementing sustainable forest management techniques for conservation purposes, as well as a tool for better understanding the role of forests in preser- ving ecosystem services.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%