TY  - JOUR
A1  - Penone, Caterina
A1  - Allan, Eric
A1  - Soliveres, Santiago
A1  - Felipe-Lucia, Maria R.
A1  - Gossner, Martin M.
A1  - Seibold, Sebastian
A1  - Simons, Nadja K.
A1  - Schall, Peter
A1  - van der Plas, Fons
A1  - Manning, Peter
A1  - Manzanedo, Ruben D.
A1  - Boch, Steffen
A1  - Prati, Daniel
A1  - Ammer, Christian
A1  - Bauhus, Juergen
A1  - Buscot, Francois
A1  - Ehbrecht, Martin
A1  - Goldmann, Kezia
A1  - Jung, Kirsten
A1  - Mueller, Joerg
A1  - Mueller, Joerg C.
A1  - Pena, Rodica
A1  - Polle, Andrea
A1  - Renner, Swen C.
A1  - Ruess, Liliane
A1  - Schoenig, Ingo
A1  - Schrumpf, Marion
A1  - Solly, Emily F.
A1  - Tschapka, Marco
A1  - Weisser, Wolfgang W.
A1  - Wubet, Tesfaye
A1  - Fischer, Markus
T1  - Specialisation and diversity of multiple trophic groups are promoted by different forest features
JF  - Ecology letters
N2  - While forest management strongly influences biodiversity, it remains unclear how the structural and compositional changes caused by management affect different community dimensions (e.g. richness, specialisation, abundance or completeness) and how this differs between taxa. We assessed the effects of nine forest features (representing stand structure, heterogeneity and tree composition) on thirteen above- and belowground trophic groups of plants, animals, fungi and bacteria in 150 temperate forest plots differing in their management type. Canopy cover decreased light resources, which increased community specialisation but reduced overall diversity and abundance. Features increasing resource types and diversifying microhabitats (admixing of oaks and conifers) were important and mostly affected richness. Belowground groups responded differently to those aboveground and had weaker responses to most forest features. Our results show that we need to consider forest features rather than broad management types and highlight the importance of considering several groups and community dimensions to better inform conservation.
KW  - biodiversity exploratories
KW  - dark diversity
KW  - forest management
KW  - global change
KW  - land-use
KW  - multidiversity
KW  - specialisation
KW  - temperate forests
Y1  - 2018
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13182
SN  - 1461-023X
SN  - 1461-0248
VL  - 22
IS  - 1
SP  - 170
EP  - 180
PB  - Wiley
CY  - Hoboken
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Heinrichs, Steffi
A1  - Ammer, Christian
A1  - Mund, Martina
A1  - Boch, Steffen
A1  - Budde, Sabine
A1  - Fischer, Markus
A1  - Mueller, Joerg
A1  - Schoening, Ingo
A1  - Schulze, Ernst-Detlef
A1  - Schmidt, Wolfgang
A1  - Weckesser, Martin
A1  - Schall, Peter
T1  - Landscape-Scale Mixtures of Tree Species are More Effective than Stand-Scale Mixtures for Biodiversity of Vascular Plants, Bryophytes and Lichens
JF  - Forests
N2  - Tree species diversity can positively affect the multifunctionality of forests. This is why conifer monocultures of Scots pine and Norway spruce, widely promoted in Central Europe since the 18th and 19th century, are currently converted into mixed stands with naturally dominant European beech. Biodiversity is expected to benefit from these mixtures compared to pure conifer stands due to increased abiotic and biotic resource heterogeneity. Evidence for this assumption is, however, largely lacking. Here, we investigated the diversity of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens at the plot (alpha diversity) and at the landscape (gamma diversity) level in pure and mixed stands of European beech and conifer species (Scots pine, Norway spruce, Douglas fir) in four regions in Germany. We aimed to identify compositions of pure and mixed stands in a hypothetical forest landscape that can optimize gamma diversity of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens within regions. Results show that gamma diversity of the investigated groups is highest when a landscape comprises different pure stands rather than tree species mixtures at the stand scale. Species mainly associated with conifers rely on light regimes that are only provided in pure conifer forests, whereas mixtures of beech and conifers are more similar to beech stands. Combining pure beech and pure conifer stands at the landscape scale can increase landscape level biodiversity and conserve species assemblages of both stand types, while landscapes solely composed of stand scale tree species mixtures could lead to a biodiversity reduction of a combination of investigated groups of 7 up to 20%.
KW  - Fagus sylvatica
KW  - Pinus sylvestris
KW  - Picea abies
KW  - Pseudotsuga menziesii
KW  - forest management
KW  - tree species diversity
KW  - forest conversion
KW  - gamma diversity
KW  - landscape scale
KW  - Biodiversity Exploratories
Y1  - 2019
U6  - https://doi.org/10.3390/f10010073
SN  - 1999-4907
VL  - 10
IS  - 1
PB  - MDPI
CY  - Basel
ER  -