• search hit 30 of 95
Back to Result List

Effects of forest management on bryophyte species richness in Central European forests

  • We studied the effect of three major forest management types (unmanaged beech, selection beech, and age class forests) and stand variables (SMId, soil pH, proportion of conifers, litter cover, deadwood cover, rock cover and cumulative cover of woody trees and shrubs) on bryophyte species richness in 1050 forest plots in three regions in Germany. In addition, we analysed the species richness of four ecological guilds of bryophytes according to their colonized substrates (deadwood, rock, soil, bark) and the number of woodland indicator bryophyte species. Beech selection forests turned out to be the most species rich management type, whereas unmanaged beech forests revealed even lower species numbers than age-class forests. Increasing conifer proportion increased bryophyte species richness but not the number of woodland indicator bryophyte species. The richness of the four ecological guilds mainly responded to the abundance of their respective substrate. We conclude that the permanent availability of suitable substrates is most importantWe studied the effect of three major forest management types (unmanaged beech, selection beech, and age class forests) and stand variables (SMId, soil pH, proportion of conifers, litter cover, deadwood cover, rock cover and cumulative cover of woody trees and shrubs) on bryophyte species richness in 1050 forest plots in three regions in Germany. In addition, we analysed the species richness of four ecological guilds of bryophytes according to their colonized substrates (deadwood, rock, soil, bark) and the number of woodland indicator bryophyte species. Beech selection forests turned out to be the most species rich management type, whereas unmanaged beech forests revealed even lower species numbers than age-class forests. Increasing conifer proportion increased bryophyte species richness but not the number of woodland indicator bryophyte species. The richness of the four ecological guilds mainly responded to the abundance of their respective substrate. We conclude that the permanent availability of suitable substrates is most important for bryophyte species richness in forests, which is not stringently linked to management type. Therefore, managed age-class forests and selection forests may even exceed unmanaged forests in bryophyte species richness due to higher substrate supply and therefore represent important habitats for bryophytes. Typical woodland indicator bryophytes and their species richness were negatively affected by SMId (management intensity) and therefore better indicate forest integrity than the species richness of all bryophytes. Nature conservation efforts should focus on the reduction of management intensity. Moreover, maintaining and increasing a variability of substrates and habitats, such as coarse woody debris, increasing structural heterogeneity by retaining patches with groups of old, mature to over-mature trees in managed forests, maintaining forest climate conditions by silvicultural methods that assure stand continuity, e.g. by selection cutting rather than clear cutting and shelterwood logging might promote bryophyte diversity and in particular the one of woodland indicator bryophytes.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:Jörg MüllerORCiDGND, Steffen BochORCiD, Daniel Prati, Stephanie A. Socher, Ulf PommerGND, Dominik HessenmöllerGND, Peter SchallORCiD, Ernst Detlef SchulzeGND, Markus FischerORCiD
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.10.019
ISSN:0378-1127
ISSN:1872-7042
Title of parent work (English):Forest ecology and management
Publisher:Elsevier
Place of publishing:Amsterdam
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Year of first publication:2018
Publication year:2018
Release date:2021/04/21
Tag:Beech forests; Conifer plantations; Cryptogams; Ecological guilds; Forest management; Selection vs. age-class forests; Temperate forests; Unmanaged vs. managed forests; Woodland indicator species
Volume:432
Number of pages:10
First page:850
Last Page:859
Funding institution:Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Priority Program 1374 "Infrastructure Biodiversity Exploratories", Germany [Fi-1246/6-1]
Organizational units:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Biochemie und Biologie
DDC classification:5 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik / 58 Pflanzen (Botanik) / 580 Pflanzen (Botanik)
Peer review:Referiert
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.