Spruce- and beech-dominated primary forests in the western Carpathians differ in terms of forest structure and bird assemblages, independently of disturbance regimes

IF 0.6 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES European journal of environmental sciences Pub Date : 2023-06-30 DOI:10.14712/23361964.2023.6
O. Kameniar, M. Baláž, Marek Svitok, M. Mikoláš, Martin Ferencik, M. Frankovič, Dheeraj Ralhan, R. Gloor, M. Svoboda
{"title":"Spruce- and beech-dominated primary forests in the western Carpathians differ in terms of forest structure and bird assemblages, independently of disturbance regimes","authors":"O. Kameniar, M. Baláž, Marek Svitok, M. Mikoláš, Martin Ferencik, M. Frankovič, Dheeraj Ralhan, R. Gloor, M. Svoboda","doi":"10.14712/23361964.2023.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mountain spruce- and beech-dominated forests (SDPF and BDPF) are of major importance in temperate Europe. However, information on the differences between their historical disturbance regimes, structures, and biodiversity is still incomplete. To address this knowledge gap, we established 118 circular research plots across 18 primary forest stands. We analysed the disturbance history of the last 250 years by dendrochronological methods and calculated disturbance frequency, severity, and timing. We also measured forest structure (DBH, tree density, volume of deadwood, and other parameters). Breeding bird populations were examined by point count method during the spring seasons 2017–2018 (SDPF) and 2019–2020 (BDPF). Using direct ordination analysis, we compared the disturbance history, structure and bird assemblage in both forest types. While no differences were found regarding disturbance regimes between forest types, forest structure and bird assemblages were significantly different. SDPF had a significantly higher density of cavities and higher canopy openness, while higher tree species richness and more intense regeneration was found in BDPF. Bird assemblage showed higher species richness in BDPF, but lower total abundance. Most bird species which occurred in both forest types were more numerous in spruce-dominated forests, but more species occurred exclusively in BDPF. Further, some SDPF- preferring species were found in naturally disturbed patches in BDPF. We conclude that although natural disturbances are important drivers of primary forest structures, differences in the bird assemblages in the explored primary forest types were largely independent of disturbance regimes.","PeriodicalId":11931,"journal":{"name":"European journal of environmental sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of environmental sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23361964.2023.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Mountain spruce- and beech-dominated forests (SDPF and BDPF) are of major importance in temperate Europe. However, information on the differences between their historical disturbance regimes, structures, and biodiversity is still incomplete. To address this knowledge gap, we established 118 circular research plots across 18 primary forest stands. We analysed the disturbance history of the last 250 years by dendrochronological methods and calculated disturbance frequency, severity, and timing. We also measured forest structure (DBH, tree density, volume of deadwood, and other parameters). Breeding bird populations were examined by point count method during the spring seasons 2017–2018 (SDPF) and 2019–2020 (BDPF). Using direct ordination analysis, we compared the disturbance history, structure and bird assemblage in both forest types. While no differences were found regarding disturbance regimes between forest types, forest structure and bird assemblages were significantly different. SDPF had a significantly higher density of cavities and higher canopy openness, while higher tree species richness and more intense regeneration was found in BDPF. Bird assemblage showed higher species richness in BDPF, but lower total abundance. Most bird species which occurred in both forest types were more numerous in spruce-dominated forests, but more species occurred exclusively in BDPF. Further, some SDPF- preferring species were found in naturally disturbed patches in BDPF. We conclude that although natural disturbances are important drivers of primary forest structures, differences in the bird assemblages in the explored primary forest types were largely independent of disturbance regimes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
喀尔巴阡山脉西部以云杉和山毛榉为主的原始森林在森林结构和鸟类组合方面存在差异,与干扰制度无关
山地云杉和山毛榉为主的森林(SDPF和BDPF)在温带欧洲具有重要意义。然而,关于它们的历史扰动机制、结构和生物多样性之间的差异的信息仍然不完整。为了解决这一知识差距,我们在18个原始林分中建立了118个圆形研究样地。我们用树木年代学方法分析了近250年的扰动历史,并计算了扰动的频率、严重程度和时间。我们还测量了森林结构(胸径、树木密度、枯木体积等参数)。采用点计数法对2017-2018年春季(SDPF)和2019-2020年春季(BDPF)的繁殖鸟类种群进行了调查。采用直接排序分析方法,比较了两种森林类型的干扰历史、结构和鸟类组合。不同森林类型间干扰程度无显著差异,但不同森林结构和鸟类群落间存在显著差异。林洞密度和林冠开度均显著高于林洞密度和林冠开度,而林洞开度显著高于林洞开度,林洞开度显著高于林洞开度,林洞开度显著高于林洞开度。鸟类群落的物种丰富度较高,但总丰度较低。两种林型的鸟类种类均以云杉为主林的鸟类种类较多,而仅以森林为主林的鸟类种类较多。此外,在BDPF的自然干扰斑块中发现了一些偏爱SDPF的物种。我们得出结论,尽管自然干扰是原生林结构的重要驱动因素,但在探索的原生林类型中,鸟类组合的差异在很大程度上与干扰制度无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
6
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Environmental Sciences offers a mixture of original refereed research papers, which bring you some of the most exciting developments in environmental sciences in the broadest sense, often with an inter- or trans-disciplinary perspective, focused on the European problems. The journal also includes critical reviews on topical issues, and overviews of the status of environmental protection in particular regions / countries. The journal covers a broad range of topics, including direct or indirect interactions between abiotic or biotic components of the environment, interactions of environment with human society, etc. The journal is published twice a year (June, December).
期刊最新文献
Difficulties in determining distribution of population sizes within different orchid metapopulations Distribution and invasiveness of four non-native species of plants in ecosystems in the Chorokhi delta (SW Georgia) Pollination strategies of deceptive orchids – a review The effect of underground drainage on peat meadows and inactivation of the drainage in an attempt to restore these meadows, which failed as it reduced the ability of soils to retain water Albedo on a glacial foreland at ground level and landscape scale driven by vegetation-substrate patterns
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1