Abstract
Abstract
Context
Forest biodiversity is closely linked to habitat heterogeneity, while forestry actions often cause habitat homogenization. Alternative approaches to even-aged management were developed to restore habitat heterogeneity at the stand level, but how their application could promote habitat diversity at landscape scale remains uncertain.
Objectives
We tested the potential benefit of diversifying management regimes to increase landscape-level heterogeneity. We hypothesize that different styles of forest management would create a diverse mosaic of forest habitats that would in turn benefit species with various habitat requirements.
Methods
Forest stands were simulated under business-as-usual management, set-aside (no management) and 12 alternative management regimes. We created virtual landscapes following diversification scenarios to (i) compare the individual performance of management regimes (no diversification), and (ii) test for the management diversification hypothesis at different levels of set-aside. For each virtual landscape, we evaluated habitat availability of six biodiversity indicator species, multispecies habitat availability, and economic values of production.
Results
Each indicator species responded differently to management regimes, with no single regime being optimal for all species at the same time. Management diversification led to a 30% gain in multispecies habitat availability, relative to business-as-usual management. By selecting a subset of five alternative management regimes with high potential for biodiversity, gains can reach 50%.
Conclusions
Various alternative management regimes offer diverse habitats for different biodiversity indicator species. Management diversification can yield large gains in multispecies habitat availability with no or low economic cost, providing a potential cost-effective biodiversity tool if the management regimes are thoughtfully selected.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Nature and Landscape Conservation,Ecology,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference61 articles.
1. Äijälä O, Koistinen A, Sved J, Vanhatalo K, Väisänen P (2014) Metsänhoidon suositukset. [The good practice guidance to forestry]. Metsäkustannus Oy, Forestry Development CentreTapio, Helsinki (In Finnish)
2. Angelstam P (1992) Conservation of communities—the importance of edges, surroundings and landscape mosaic structure. In: Hansson L (ed) The ecological principles of nature conservation: applications in temperate and boreal environments. Springer Verlag, New York, pp 9–70
3. Angelstam PK (1998) Maintaining and restoring biodiversity in European boreal forests by developing natural disturbance regimes. J Veg Sci 9:593–602
4. Angelstam P, Boutin S, Schmiegelow F et al (2004) Targets for Boreal forest biodiversity conservation: a rationale for macroecological research and adaptive management. Ecol Bull 51:487–509
5. Barbaro L, Rossi J-P, Vetillard F et al (2007) The spatial distribution of birds and carabid beetles in pine plantation forests: the role of landscape composition and structure. J Biogeogr 34:652–664
Cited by
17 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献