author_facet Baker, Susan C.
Halpern, Charles B.
Wardlaw, Timothy J.
Kern, Christel
Edgar, Graham J.
Thomson, Russell J.
Bigley, Richard E.
Franklin, Jerry F.
Gandhi, Kamal J. K.
Gustafsson, Lena
Johnson, Samuel
Palik, Brian J.
Spies, Thomas A.
Steel, E. Ashley
Weslien, Jan
Strengbom, Joachim
Baker, Susan C.
Halpern, Charles B.
Wardlaw, Timothy J.
Kern, Christel
Edgar, Graham J.
Thomson, Russell J.
Bigley, Richard E.
Franklin, Jerry F.
Gandhi, Kamal J. K.
Gustafsson, Lena
Johnson, Samuel
Palik, Brian J.
Spies, Thomas A.
Steel, E. Ashley
Weslien, Jan
Strengbom, Joachim
author Baker, Susan C.
Halpern, Charles B.
Wardlaw, Timothy J.
Kern, Christel
Edgar, Graham J.
Thomson, Russell J.
Bigley, Richard E.
Franklin, Jerry F.
Gandhi, Kamal J. K.
Gustafsson, Lena
Johnson, Samuel
Palik, Brian J.
Spies, Thomas A.
Steel, E. Ashley
Weslien, Jan
Strengbom, Joachim
spellingShingle Baker, Susan C.
Halpern, Charles B.
Wardlaw, Timothy J.
Kern, Christel
Edgar, Graham J.
Thomson, Russell J.
Bigley, Richard E.
Franklin, Jerry F.
Gandhi, Kamal J. K.
Gustafsson, Lena
Johnson, Samuel
Palik, Brian J.
Spies, Thomas A.
Steel, E. Ashley
Weslien, Jan
Strengbom, Joachim
Ecological Applications
A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
Ecology
author_sort baker, susan c.
spelling Baker, Susan C. Halpern, Charles B. Wardlaw, Timothy J. Kern, Christel Edgar, Graham J. Thomson, Russell J. Bigley, Richard E. Franklin, Jerry F. Gandhi, Kamal J. K. Gustafsson, Lena Johnson, Samuel Palik, Brian J. Spies, Thomas A. Steel, E. Ashley Weslien, Jan Strengbom, Joachim 1051-0761 1939-5582 Wiley Ecology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1406 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Timber harvest can adversely affect forest biota. Recent research and application suggest that retention of mature forest elements (retention forestry), including unharvested patches (or aggregates) within larger harvested units, can benefit biodiversity compared to clearcutting. However, it is unclear whether these benefits can be generalized among the diverse taxa and biomes in which retention forestry is practiced. Lack of comparability in methods for sampling and analyzing responses to timber harvest and edge creation presents a challenge to synthesis. We used a consistent methodology (similarly spaced plots or traps along transects) to investigate responses of vascular plants and ground‐active beetles to aggregated retention at replicate sites in each of four temperate and boreal forest types on three continents: Douglas‐fir forests in Washington, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; aspen forests in Minnesota, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; spruce forests in Sweden; and wet eucalypt forests in Tasmania, Australia. We assessed (1) differences in local (plot‐scale) species richness and composition between mature (intact) and regenerating (previously harvested) forest; (2) the lifeboating function of aggregates (capacity to retain species of unharvested forest); and whether intact forests and aggregates (3) are susceptible to edge effects and (4) influence the adjacent regenerating forest. Intact and harvested forests differed in composition but not richness of plants and beetles. The magnitude of this difference was generally similar among regions, but there was considerable heterogeneity of composition within and among replicate sites. Aggregates within harvest units were effective at lifeboating for both plant and beetle communities. Edge effects were uncommon even within the aggregates. In contrast, effects of forest influence on adjacent harvested areas were common and as strong for aggregates as for larger blocks of intact forest. Our results provide strong support for the widespread application of aggregated retention in boreal and temperate forests. The consistency of pattern in four very different regions of the world suggests that, for forest plants and beetles, responses to aggregated retention are likely to apply more widely. Our results suggest that through strategic placement of aggregates, it is possible to maintain the natural heterogeneity and biodiversity of mature forests managed for multiple objectives.</jats:p> A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest Ecological Applications
doi_str_mv 10.1002/eap.1406
facet_avail Online
finc_class_facet Geographie
format ElectronicArticle
fullrecord blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9lYXAuMTQwNg
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9lYXAuMTQwNg
institution DE-D275
DE-Bn3
DE-Brt1
DE-D161
DE-Gla1
DE-Zi4
DE-15
DE-Pl11
DE-Rs1
DE-105
DE-14
DE-Ch1
DE-L229
imprint Wiley, 2016
imprint_str_mv Wiley, 2016
issn 1051-0761
1939-5582
issn_str_mv 1051-0761
1939-5582
language English
mega_collection Wiley (CrossRef)
match_str baker2016acrosscontinentalcomparisonofplantandbeetleresponsestoretentionofforestpatchesduringtimberharvest
publishDateSort 2016
publisher Wiley
recordtype ai
record_format ai
series Ecological Applications
source_id 49
title A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_unstemmed A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_full A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_fullStr A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_full_unstemmed A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_short A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_sort a cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
topic Ecology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1406
publishDate 2016
physical 2495-2506
description <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Timber harvest can adversely affect forest biota. Recent research and application suggest that retention of mature forest elements (retention forestry), including unharvested patches (or aggregates) within larger harvested units, can benefit biodiversity compared to clearcutting. However, it is unclear whether these benefits can be generalized among the diverse taxa and biomes in which retention forestry is practiced. Lack of comparability in methods for sampling and analyzing responses to timber harvest and edge creation presents a challenge to synthesis. We used a consistent methodology (similarly spaced plots or traps along transects) to investigate responses of vascular plants and ground‐active beetles to aggregated retention at replicate sites in each of four temperate and boreal forest types on three continents: Douglas‐fir forests in Washington, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; aspen forests in Minnesota, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; spruce forests in Sweden; and wet eucalypt forests in Tasmania, Australia. We assessed (1) differences in local (plot‐scale) species richness and composition between mature (intact) and regenerating (previously harvested) forest; (2) the lifeboating function of aggregates (capacity to retain species of unharvested forest); and whether intact forests and aggregates (3) are susceptible to edge effects and (4) influence the adjacent regenerating forest. Intact and harvested forests differed in composition but not richness of plants and beetles. The magnitude of this difference was generally similar among regions, but there was considerable heterogeneity of composition within and among replicate sites. Aggregates within harvest units were effective at lifeboating for both plant and beetle communities. Edge effects were uncommon even within the aggregates. In contrast, effects of forest influence on adjacent harvested areas were common and as strong for aggregates as for larger blocks of intact forest. Our results provide strong support for the widespread application of aggregated retention in boreal and temperate forests. The consistency of pattern in four very different regions of the world suggests that, for forest plants and beetles, responses to aggregated retention are likely to apply more widely. Our results suggest that through strategic placement of aggregates, it is possible to maintain the natural heterogeneity and biodiversity of mature forests managed for multiple objectives.</jats:p>
container_issue 8
container_start_page 2495
container_title Ecological Applications
container_volume 26
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
_version_ 1792334669198393353
geogr_code not assigned
last_indexed 2024-03-01T14:31:48.396Z
geogr_code_person not assigned
openURL url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=A+cross%E2%80%90continental+comparison+of+plant+and+beetle+responses+to+retention+of+forest+patches+during+timber+harvest&rft.date=2016-12-01&genre=article&issn=1939-5582&volume=26&issue=8&spage=2495&epage=2506&pages=2495-2506&jtitle=Ecological+Applications&atitle=A+cross%E2%80%90continental+comparison+of+plant+and+beetle+responses+to+retention+of+forest+patches+during+timber+harvest&aulast=Strengbom&aufirst=Joachim&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1002%2Feap.1406&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng
SOLR
_version_ 1792334669198393353
author Baker, Susan C., Halpern, Charles B., Wardlaw, Timothy J., Kern, Christel, Edgar, Graham J., Thomson, Russell J., Bigley, Richard E., Franklin, Jerry F., Gandhi, Kamal J. K., Gustafsson, Lena, Johnson, Samuel, Palik, Brian J., Spies, Thomas A., Steel, E. Ashley, Weslien, Jan, Strengbom, Joachim
author_facet Baker, Susan C., Halpern, Charles B., Wardlaw, Timothy J., Kern, Christel, Edgar, Graham J., Thomson, Russell J., Bigley, Richard E., Franklin, Jerry F., Gandhi, Kamal J. K., Gustafsson, Lena, Johnson, Samuel, Palik, Brian J., Spies, Thomas A., Steel, E. Ashley, Weslien, Jan, Strengbom, Joachim, Baker, Susan C., Halpern, Charles B., Wardlaw, Timothy J., Kern, Christel, Edgar, Graham J., Thomson, Russell J., Bigley, Richard E., Franklin, Jerry F., Gandhi, Kamal J. K., Gustafsson, Lena, Johnson, Samuel, Palik, Brian J., Spies, Thomas A., Steel, E. Ashley, Weslien, Jan, Strengbom, Joachim
author_sort baker, susan c.
container_issue 8
container_start_page 2495
container_title Ecological Applications
container_volume 26
description <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Timber harvest can adversely affect forest biota. Recent research and application suggest that retention of mature forest elements (retention forestry), including unharvested patches (or aggregates) within larger harvested units, can benefit biodiversity compared to clearcutting. However, it is unclear whether these benefits can be generalized among the diverse taxa and biomes in which retention forestry is practiced. Lack of comparability in methods for sampling and analyzing responses to timber harvest and edge creation presents a challenge to synthesis. We used a consistent methodology (similarly spaced plots or traps along transects) to investigate responses of vascular plants and ground‐active beetles to aggregated retention at replicate sites in each of four temperate and boreal forest types on three continents: Douglas‐fir forests in Washington, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; aspen forests in Minnesota, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; spruce forests in Sweden; and wet eucalypt forests in Tasmania, Australia. We assessed (1) differences in local (plot‐scale) species richness and composition between mature (intact) and regenerating (previously harvested) forest; (2) the lifeboating function of aggregates (capacity to retain species of unharvested forest); and whether intact forests and aggregates (3) are susceptible to edge effects and (4) influence the adjacent regenerating forest. Intact and harvested forests differed in composition but not richness of plants and beetles. The magnitude of this difference was generally similar among regions, but there was considerable heterogeneity of composition within and among replicate sites. Aggregates within harvest units were effective at lifeboating for both plant and beetle communities. Edge effects were uncommon even within the aggregates. In contrast, effects of forest influence on adjacent harvested areas were common and as strong for aggregates as for larger blocks of intact forest. Our results provide strong support for the widespread application of aggregated retention in boreal and temperate forests. The consistency of pattern in four very different regions of the world suggests that, for forest plants and beetles, responses to aggregated retention are likely to apply more widely. Our results suggest that through strategic placement of aggregates, it is possible to maintain the natural heterogeneity and biodiversity of mature forests managed for multiple objectives.</jats:p>
doi_str_mv 10.1002/eap.1406
facet_avail Online
finc_class_facet Geographie
format ElectronicArticle
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
geogr_code not assigned
geogr_code_person not assigned
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9lYXAuMTQwNg
imprint Wiley, 2016
imprint_str_mv Wiley, 2016
institution DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229
issn 1051-0761, 1939-5582
issn_str_mv 1051-0761, 1939-5582
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-01T14:31:48.396Z
match_str baker2016acrosscontinentalcomparisonofplantandbeetleresponsestoretentionofforestpatchesduringtimberharvest
mega_collection Wiley (CrossRef)
physical 2495-2506
publishDate 2016
publishDateSort 2016
publisher Wiley
record_format ai
recordtype ai
series Ecological Applications
source_id 49
spelling Baker, Susan C. Halpern, Charles B. Wardlaw, Timothy J. Kern, Christel Edgar, Graham J. Thomson, Russell J. Bigley, Richard E. Franklin, Jerry F. Gandhi, Kamal J. K. Gustafsson, Lena Johnson, Samuel Palik, Brian J. Spies, Thomas A. Steel, E. Ashley Weslien, Jan Strengbom, Joachim 1051-0761 1939-5582 Wiley Ecology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1406 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Timber harvest can adversely affect forest biota. Recent research and application suggest that retention of mature forest elements (retention forestry), including unharvested patches (or aggregates) within larger harvested units, can benefit biodiversity compared to clearcutting. However, it is unclear whether these benefits can be generalized among the diverse taxa and biomes in which retention forestry is practiced. Lack of comparability in methods for sampling and analyzing responses to timber harvest and edge creation presents a challenge to synthesis. We used a consistent methodology (similarly spaced plots or traps along transects) to investigate responses of vascular plants and ground‐active beetles to aggregated retention at replicate sites in each of four temperate and boreal forest types on three continents: Douglas‐fir forests in Washington, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; aspen forests in Minnesota, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">USA</jats:styled-content>; spruce forests in Sweden; and wet eucalypt forests in Tasmania, Australia. We assessed (1) differences in local (plot‐scale) species richness and composition between mature (intact) and regenerating (previously harvested) forest; (2) the lifeboating function of aggregates (capacity to retain species of unharvested forest); and whether intact forests and aggregates (3) are susceptible to edge effects and (4) influence the adjacent regenerating forest. Intact and harvested forests differed in composition but not richness of plants and beetles. The magnitude of this difference was generally similar among regions, but there was considerable heterogeneity of composition within and among replicate sites. Aggregates within harvest units were effective at lifeboating for both plant and beetle communities. Edge effects were uncommon even within the aggregates. In contrast, effects of forest influence on adjacent harvested areas were common and as strong for aggregates as for larger blocks of intact forest. Our results provide strong support for the widespread application of aggregated retention in boreal and temperate forests. The consistency of pattern in four very different regions of the world suggests that, for forest plants and beetles, responses to aggregated retention are likely to apply more widely. Our results suggest that through strategic placement of aggregates, it is possible to maintain the natural heterogeneity and biodiversity of mature forests managed for multiple objectives.</jats:p> A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest Ecological Applications
spellingShingle Baker, Susan C., Halpern, Charles B., Wardlaw, Timothy J., Kern, Christel, Edgar, Graham J., Thomson, Russell J., Bigley, Richard E., Franklin, Jerry F., Gandhi, Kamal J. K., Gustafsson, Lena, Johnson, Samuel, Palik, Brian J., Spies, Thomas A., Steel, E. Ashley, Weslien, Jan, Strengbom, Joachim, Ecological Applications, A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest, Ecology
title A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_full A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_fullStr A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_full_unstemmed A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_short A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_sort a cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
title_unstemmed A cross‐continental comparison of plant and beetle responses to retention of forest patches during timber harvest
topic Ecology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1406