Loading...
Pubblicazioni Scientifiche
Filtri di ricerca 2 risultati
Pubblicazioni per anno
Handbook of field sampling for multi-taxon biodiversity studies in European forests
Burrascano
,
Sabina
,
Trentanovi
,
Giovanni
,
Paillet
,
Yoan
,
Heilmann-Clausen
,
Jacob
,
Giordani
,
P.
,
Bagella
,
Simonetta
,
Bravo-Oviedo
,
Andrés
,
Campagnaro
,
Thomas
,
Campanaro
,
Alessandro
,
Chianucci
,
Francesco
,
de Smedt
,
Pallieter
,
Itziar
,
García Mijangos
,
Matošević
,
Dinka
,
Sitzia
,
Tommaso
,
Aszalós
,
Réka
,
Brazaitis
,
Gediminas
,
Cutini
,
Andrea
,
D'Andrea
,
Ettore
,
Doerfler
,
Inken
,
Hofmeister
,
Jeňýk
,
Hošek
,
Jan
,
Janssen
,
Philippe
,
Kepfer-Rojas
,
Sebastian
,
Korboulewsky
,
Nathalie
,
Kozák
,
Daniel
,
Lachat
,
Thibault
,
Lõhmus
,
Asko
,
López
,
Rosana
,
Mårell
,
Anders
,
Matula
,
Radim
,
Mikoláš
,
Martin
,
Munzi
,
Silvana
,
Nordén
,
Björn
,
Pärtel
,
Meelis
,
Penner
,
Johannes
,
Runnel
,
Kadri
,
Schall
,
Peter
,
Svoboda
,
Miroslav
,
Tinya
,
Flóra
,
Ujházyová
,
Mariana
,
Vandekerkhove
,
Kris
,
Verheyen
,
Kris
,
Xystrakis
,
Fotios
,
Ódor
,
Péter
Mostra abstract
Forests host most terrestrial biodiversity and their sustainable management is crucial to halt biodiversity loss. Although scientific evidence indicates that sustainable forest management (SFM) should be assessed by monitoring multi-taxon biodiversity, most current SFM criteria and indicators account only for trees or consider indirect biodiversity proxies. Several projects performed multi-taxon sampling to investigate the effects of forest management on biodiversity, but the large variability of their sampling approaches hampers the identification of general trends, and limits broad-scale inference for designing SFM. Here we address the need of common sampling protocols for forest structure and multi-taxon biodiversity to be used at broad spatial scales. We established a network of researchers involved in 41 projects on forest multi-taxon biodiversity across 13 European countries. The network data structure comprised the assessment of at least three taxa, and the measurement of forest stand structure in the same plots or stands. We mapped the sampling approaches to multi-taxon biodiversity, standing trees and deadwood, and used this overview to provide operational answers to two simple, yet crucial, questions: what to sample? How to sample? The most commonly sampled taxonomic groups are vascular plants (83% of datasets), beetles (80%), lichens (66%), birds (66%), fungi (61%), bryophytes (49%). They cover different forest structures and habitats, with a limited focus on soil, litter and forest canopy. Notwithstanding the common goal of assessing forest management effects on biodiversity, sampling approaches differed widely within and among taxonomic groups. Differences derive from sampling units (plots size, use of stand vs. plot scale), and from the focus on different substrates or functional groups of organisms. Sampling methods for standing trees and lying deadwood were relatively homogeneous and focused on volume calculations, but with a great variability in sampling units and diameter thresholds. We developed a handbook of sampling methods (SI 3) aimed at the greatest possible comparability across taxonomic groups and studies as a basis for European-wide biodiversity monitoring programs, robust understanding of biodiversity response to forest structure and management, and the identification of direct indicators of SFM. © 2021 The Authors
Testing an expanded set of sustainable forest management indicators in Mediterranean coppice area
Cutini
,
Andrea
,
Ferretti
,
Marco
,
Bertini
,
Giada
,
Brunialti
,
Giorgio
,
Bagella
,
Simonetta
,
Chianucci
,
Francesco
,
Fabbio
,
Gianfranco
,
Fratini
,
Roberto
,
Riccioli
,
Francesco
,
Caddeo
,
C.
,
Calderisi
,
Marco
,
Ciucchi
,
B.
,
Corradini
,
Stefano
,
Cristofolini
,
Fabiana
,
Cristofori
,
Antonella
,
Di Salvatore
,
Umberto
,
Ferrara
,
Carlotta
,
Frati
,
Luisa
,
Landi
,
Sara
,
Marchino
,
Luca
,
Patteri
,
Giacomo
,
Piovosi
,
Maurizio
,
Roggero
,
Pier Paolo
,
Seddaiu
,
Giovanna
,
Gottardini
,
Elena
silviculture
coppice conversion
coppice natural evolution
coppice system
environmental monitoring
sfm criteria
Mostra abstract
Although coppice forests represent a significant part of the European forest area, especially across southern Countries, they received little attention within the Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) processes and scenarios, whose guidelines have been mainly designed to high forests and national scale. In order to obtain “tailored” information on the degree of sustainability of coppices on the scale of the stand, we evaluated (i) whether the main coppice management options result in different responses of the SFM indicators, and (ii) the degree to which the considered SFM indicators were appropriate in their application at stand level. The study considered three different management options (Traditional Coppice TC, coppice under Natural Evolution NE, and coppice under Conversion to high forest by means of periodical thinning CO). In each of the 43 plots considered in the study, which covered three different European Forest Types, we applied a set of eighteen “consolidated” SFM indicators, covering all the six SFM Criteria (FOREST EUROPE, 2020) and, additionally, tested other sixteen novel indicators shaped for agamic forests and/or applicable at stand level. Results confirmed that several consolidated indicators related to resources status (Growing stock and Carbon stock), health (Defoliation and Forest damage), and socio-economic functions (Net revenue, Energy and Accessibility) were highly appropriate for evaluating the sustainability of coppice at stand level. In addition, some novel indicators related to resources status (Total above ground tree biomass), health (Stand growth) and protective functions (Overstorey cover and Understorey cover) proved to be highly appropriate and able to support the information obtained by the consolidated ones. As a consequence, a subset of consolidated SFM indicators, complemented with the most appropriate novel ones, may represent a valid option to support the evaluation of coppice sustainability at stand level. An integrated analysis of the SFM indicators showed that NE and CO display significant higher environmental performances as compared with TC. In addition, CO has positive effects also on socio-economic issues, while TC -which is an important cultural heritage and a silvicultural option that may help to keep local communities engaged in forestry – combines high wood harvesting rates with dense understory cover. Overall, each of the three management options showed specific sustainability values; as a consequence, their coexistence at a local scale and in accordance with the specific environmental conditions and the social-economic context, is greatly recommended since it may fulfill a wider array of sustainability issues. © 2021