Skip Navigation


Forestry Advance Access originally published online on September 13, 2007
Forestry 2007 80(5):503-516; doi:10.1093/forestry/cpm027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
80/5/503    most recent
cpm027v2
cpm027v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosenvald, R.
Right arrow Articles by Lõhmus, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Institute of Chartered Foresters, 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Breeding birds in hemiboreal clear-cuts: tree-retention effects in relation to site type

R. Rosenvald1,* and A. Lõhmus2

1 Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, Estonia
2 Institute of Zoology and Hydrobiology, Centre of Basic and Applied Ecology, University of Tartu, Vanemuise 46, 51014 Tartu, Estonia

* Corresponding author. E-mail: raul.rosenvald{at}emu.ee


  Abstract

The variability of natural disturbance regimes implies that retention cutting, aimed at emulating natural disturbances to support biodiversity, should be forest-type specific. We explored in four site types (ranging from dry nutrient-poor to wet nutrient-rich) in Estonia how the retention of live and dead trees affects post-cut abundance and species richness of birds. The whole bird communities and harvest-sensitive species groups responded differently: while the total abundance and relative species richness of birds increased along with the abundance of dead trees, the species of national conservation concern occurred more frequently at higher densities of live trees. Hence, although the species of conservation concern and hole-nesters preferred the cuts having the generally densest and most species-rich avian communities, this co-variation was obviously insufficient for using the total community characteristics (particularly density) as indicators of forestry impacts on bird biodiversity. In contrast to expectations, tree retention always influenced birds independently of forest type. This may be related to the particular study system (notably low retention levels) but future studies should nevertheless explicitly address to what extent forest species are adapted to natural disturbances, and in which cases that knowledge can be used for forestry planning.

Received 26 January 2007.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.