Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest
1. Variable-retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear-cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest-inhab...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of applied ecology 2018-03, Vol.55 (2), p.947-957 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 957 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 947 |
container_title | The Journal of applied ecology |
container_volume | 55 |
creator | Bartels, Samuel F. Macdonald, S. Ellen Johnson, Derek Caners, Richard T. Spence, John R. |
description | 1. Variable-retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear-cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest-inhabiting bryophytes. 2. We examined how bryophyte species cover, richness, diversity and composition change with time in response to a broad range of dispersed retention harvest treatments (2% [clear-cut], 10%, 20%, 50%, 75% retention of original basal area) contrasted with uncut controls [100% retention]) in broadleaf deciduous, mixedwood and conifer-dominated boreal forests in North West Alberta, Canada. Bryophytes were studied in 432 permanent sample plots within 72 compartments before harvest and at 3, 6 and 11 years after harvest. 3. Clear-cut and lower (10% and 20%) retention levels resulted in lower cover and richness of bryophytes than in unharvested control compartments in mixed and conifer-dominated forests, but less so in deciduous-dominated forests, which generally supported low cover and richness. Species composition in each forest type varied along the gradient of harvesting intensity; clear-cuts and lower levels of retention supported similar composition, as did control plots and those representing higher retention levels. Over time, the retention harvest treatments became more similar to uncut controls. 4. Synthesis and applications. Variable-retention harvests can better maintain bryophyte biodiversity in managed boreal mixedwood forests, as compared to clearcuts. We found the efficacy of retention harvest scaled with harvest intensity. Higher levels of retention better moderated the negative impacts of harvesting on bryophyte assemblages across all forest types. Our results suggest, however, that even 10% retention will facilitate faster post-harvest recovery of bryophytes, as compared to clear-cutting. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/1365-2664.12999 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2000969598</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45024774</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45024774</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3789-767bf32764a498d3187ef80cb3379d50c49d17a8ad9da226b763b718708a124d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkElPwzAQhS0EEqVw5oRkiStpvSRejlCVTZXgAGfLiR01VRsHO23Jv8dpoFfmMprR--ZpHgDXGE1wrCmmLEsIY-kEEynlCRgdN6dghBDBiZAIn4OLEFYIIZlROgL6wXeuWXathTrf1kbXhb2DptpZH6q2g7o2sHCbxsWpcjXUZWs99La19WFear-zoYVVDXPnrV7DTfVtzd45A8u4CO0lOCv1Otir3z4Gn4_zj9lzsnh7epndL5KCciETznheUsJZqlMpDMWC21KgIqeUS5OhIpUGcy20kUYTwnLOaM6jCgmNSWroGNwOdxvvvrbRWK3c1tfRUpH-XSYzKaJqOqgK70LwtlSNrzbadwoj1eeo-tRUn5o65BiJbCD21dp2_8nV6_v8j7sZuFVonT9yaYZIynlKfwBDMn7p</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2000969598</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Bartels, Samuel F. ; Macdonald, S. Ellen ; Johnson, Derek ; Caners, Richard T. ; Spence, John R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bartels, Samuel F. ; Macdonald, S. Ellen ; Johnson, Derek ; Caners, Richard T. ; Spence, John R.</creatorcontrib><description>1. Variable-retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear-cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest-inhabiting bryophytes. 2. We examined how bryophyte species cover, richness, diversity and composition change with time in response to a broad range of dispersed retention harvest treatments (2% [clear-cut], 10%, 20%, 50%, 75% retention of original basal area) contrasted with uncut controls [100% retention]) in broadleaf deciduous, mixedwood and conifer-dominated boreal forests in North West Alberta, Canada. Bryophytes were studied in 432 permanent sample plots within 72 compartments before harvest and at 3, 6 and 11 years after harvest. 3. Clear-cut and lower (10% and 20%) retention levels resulted in lower cover and richness of bryophytes than in unharvested control compartments in mixed and conifer-dominated forests, but less so in deciduous-dominated forests, which generally supported low cover and richness. Species composition in each forest type varied along the gradient of harvesting intensity; clear-cuts and lower levels of retention supported similar composition, as did control plots and those representing higher retention levels. Over time, the retention harvest treatments became more similar to uncut controls. 4. Synthesis and applications. Variable-retention harvests can better maintain bryophyte biodiversity in managed boreal mixedwood forests, as compared to clearcuts. We found the efficacy of retention harvest scaled with harvest intensity. Higher levels of retention better moderated the negative impacts of harvesting on bryophyte assemblages across all forest types. Our results suggest, however, that even 10% retention will facilitate faster post-harvest recovery of bryophytes, as compared to clear-cutting.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12999</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: John Wiley & Sons Ltd</publisher><subject>Aquatic plants ; Biodiversity ; boreal forest ; Boreal forests ; Bryophytes ; Clearcutting ; clear‐cutting ; Compartments ; Deciduous forests ; dispersed green‐tree retention ; Forest management ; forest type ; Forests ; Harvesting ; liverworts ; mosses ; natural disturbance emulation ; Recovery ; Retention ; retention harvest ; Species composition ; Species diversity ; Taiga ; time since harvest ; variable‐retention harvest</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 2018-03, Vol.55 (2), p.947-957</ispartof><rights>2018 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2017 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>Journal of Applied Ecology © 2018 British Ecological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3789-767bf32764a498d3187ef80cb3379d50c49d17a8ad9da226b763b718708a124d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3789-767bf32764a498d3187ef80cb3379d50c49d17a8ad9da226b763b718708a124d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2676-3295 ; 0000-0003-1750-1779 ; 0000-0002-7504-2462</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45024774$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45024774$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bartels, Samuel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Macdonald, S. Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Derek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caners, Richard T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spence, John R.</creatorcontrib><title>Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>1. Variable-retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear-cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest-inhabiting bryophytes. 2. We examined how bryophyte species cover, richness, diversity and composition change with time in response to a broad range of dispersed retention harvest treatments (2% [clear-cut], 10%, 20%, 50%, 75% retention of original basal area) contrasted with uncut controls [100% retention]) in broadleaf deciduous, mixedwood and conifer-dominated boreal forests in North West Alberta, Canada. Bryophytes were studied in 432 permanent sample plots within 72 compartments before harvest and at 3, 6 and 11 years after harvest. 3. Clear-cut and lower (10% and 20%) retention levels resulted in lower cover and richness of bryophytes than in unharvested control compartments in mixed and conifer-dominated forests, but less so in deciduous-dominated forests, which generally supported low cover and richness. Species composition in each forest type varied along the gradient of harvesting intensity; clear-cuts and lower levels of retention supported similar composition, as did control plots and those representing higher retention levels. Over time, the retention harvest treatments became more similar to uncut controls. 4. Synthesis and applications. Variable-retention harvests can better maintain bryophyte biodiversity in managed boreal mixedwood forests, as compared to clearcuts. We found the efficacy of retention harvest scaled with harvest intensity. Higher levels of retention better moderated the negative impacts of harvesting on bryophyte assemblages across all forest types. Our results suggest, however, that even 10% retention will facilitate faster post-harvest recovery of bryophytes, as compared to clear-cutting.</description><subject>Aquatic plants</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>boreal forest</subject><subject>Boreal forests</subject><subject>Bryophytes</subject><subject>Clearcutting</subject><subject>clear‐cutting</subject><subject>Compartments</subject><subject>Deciduous forests</subject><subject>dispersed green‐tree retention</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>forest type</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Harvesting</subject><subject>liverworts</subject><subject>mosses</subject><subject>natural disturbance emulation</subject><subject>Recovery</subject><subject>Retention</subject><subject>retention harvest</subject><subject>Species composition</subject><subject>Species diversity</subject><subject>Taiga</subject><subject>time since harvest</subject><subject>variable‐retention harvest</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkElPwzAQhS0EEqVw5oRkiStpvSRejlCVTZXgAGfLiR01VRsHO23Jv8dpoFfmMprR--ZpHgDXGE1wrCmmLEsIY-kEEynlCRgdN6dghBDBiZAIn4OLEFYIIZlROgL6wXeuWXathTrf1kbXhb2DptpZH6q2g7o2sHCbxsWpcjXUZWs99La19WFear-zoYVVDXPnrV7DTfVtzd45A8u4CO0lOCv1Otir3z4Gn4_zj9lzsnh7epndL5KCciETznheUsJZqlMpDMWC21KgIqeUS5OhIpUGcy20kUYTwnLOaM6jCgmNSWroGNwOdxvvvrbRWK3c1tfRUpH-XSYzKaJqOqgK70LwtlSNrzbadwoj1eeo-tRUn5o65BiJbCD21dp2_8nV6_v8j7sZuFVonT9yaYZIynlKfwBDMn7p</recordid><startdate>20180301</startdate><enddate>20180301</enddate><creator>Bartels, Samuel F.</creator><creator>Macdonald, S. Ellen</creator><creator>Johnson, Derek</creator><creator>Caners, Richard T.</creator><creator>Spence, John R.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2676-3295</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1750-1779</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7504-2462</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180301</creationdate><title>Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest</title><author>Bartels, Samuel F. ; Macdonald, S. Ellen ; Johnson, Derek ; Caners, Richard T. ; Spence, John R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3789-767bf32764a498d3187ef80cb3379d50c49d17a8ad9da226b763b718708a124d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Aquatic plants</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>boreal forest</topic><topic>Boreal forests</topic><topic>Bryophytes</topic><topic>Clearcutting</topic><topic>clear‐cutting</topic><topic>Compartments</topic><topic>Deciduous forests</topic><topic>dispersed green‐tree retention</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>forest type</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Harvesting</topic><topic>liverworts</topic><topic>mosses</topic><topic>natural disturbance emulation</topic><topic>Recovery</topic><topic>Retention</topic><topic>retention harvest</topic><topic>Species composition</topic><topic>Species diversity</topic><topic>Taiga</topic><topic>time since harvest</topic><topic>variable‐retention harvest</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bartels, Samuel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Macdonald, S. Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Derek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caners, Richard T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spence, John R.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bartels, Samuel F.</au><au>Macdonald, S. Ellen</au><au>Johnson, Derek</au><au>Caners, Richard T.</au><au>Spence, John R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>2018-03-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>947</spage><epage>957</epage><pages>947-957</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><abstract>1. Variable-retention harvest is widely recognized as an alternative to more intensive methods such as clear-cutting. However, present information is inadequate to judge the impact of variable retention on biodiversity of indigenous forest organisms intolerant of canopy removal, such as forest-inhabiting bryophytes. 2. We examined how bryophyte species cover, richness, diversity and composition change with time in response to a broad range of dispersed retention harvest treatments (2% [clear-cut], 10%, 20%, 50%, 75% retention of original basal area) contrasted with uncut controls [100% retention]) in broadleaf deciduous, mixedwood and conifer-dominated boreal forests in North West Alberta, Canada. Bryophytes were studied in 432 permanent sample plots within 72 compartments before harvest and at 3, 6 and 11 years after harvest. 3. Clear-cut and lower (10% and 20%) retention levels resulted in lower cover and richness of bryophytes than in unharvested control compartments in mixed and conifer-dominated forests, but less so in deciduous-dominated forests, which generally supported low cover and richness. Species composition in each forest type varied along the gradient of harvesting intensity; clear-cuts and lower levels of retention supported similar composition, as did control plots and those representing higher retention levels. Over time, the retention harvest treatments became more similar to uncut controls. 4. Synthesis and applications. Variable-retention harvests can better maintain bryophyte biodiversity in managed boreal mixedwood forests, as compared to clearcuts. We found the efficacy of retention harvest scaled with harvest intensity. Higher levels of retention better moderated the negative impacts of harvesting on bryophyte assemblages across all forest types. Our results suggest, however, that even 10% retention will facilitate faster post-harvest recovery of bryophytes, as compared to clear-cutting.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/1365-2664.12999</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2676-3295</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1750-1779</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7504-2462</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8901 |
ispartof | The Journal of applied ecology, 2018-03, Vol.55 (2), p.947-957 |
issn | 0021-8901 1365-2664 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2000969598 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Free Content; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Aquatic plants Biodiversity boreal forest Boreal forests Bryophytes Clearcutting clear‐cutting Compartments Deciduous forests dispersed green‐tree retention Forest management forest type Forests Harvesting liverworts mosses natural disturbance emulation Recovery Retention retention harvest Species composition Species diversity Taiga time since harvest variable‐retention harvest |
title | Bryophyte abundance, diversity and composition after retention harvest in boreal mixedwood forest |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T18%3A52%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bryophyte%20abundance,%20diversity%20and%20composition%20after%20retention%20harvest%20in%20boreal%20mixedwood%20forest&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=Bartels,%20Samuel%20F.&rft.date=2018-03-01&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=947&rft.epage=957&rft.pages=947-957&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12999&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45024774%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2000969598&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=45024774&rfr_iscdi=true |