Pubblicazioni Scientifiche

Filtri di ricerca 6 risultati
Reset
Pubblicazioni per anno
Managed forests are a stronghold of non-native beetles in Europe
Basile , Marco , Lachat , Thibault , Balducci , Lorenzo , Chianucci , Francesco , Chojnacki , Lucas , Archaux , Frédéric , N Avtzis , Dimitrios N. , Bouget , Christophe , de Smedt , Pallieter , Doerfler , Inken , Dumas , Yann , Elek , Zoltán , Gosselin , Marion , Goßner , Martin M. , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Janssen , Philippe , Justesen , Mathias Just , Hansen , Aslak Kappel , Schmidt , Inger Kappel , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Mårell , Anders , Matula , Radim , Müller , Jörg C. C. , Nordén , Björn , Ódor , Péter , Paillet , Yoan , Ravera , Sonia , Sitzia , Tommaso , Tinya , Flóra , Burrascano , Sabina , Brockerhoff , Eckehard G.
biodiversity biological invasions biotic resistance coleoptera unmanaged forests vascular plants
Mostra abstract
The species richness of vascular plants in forests can have contrasting effects on the occurrence of non-native insects. The establishment of non-native insect populations may be facilitated by low plant species richness, which reflects the availability of few but easily accessible resources, or hampered by high plant species richness due to spatial dilution of resources or biotic resistance (i.e., resistance against biological invasions). The relationship between the species richness of plants and non-native insects is likely influenced by disturbance regimes, which, in European forests, mostly consists of timber harvesting. We investigated this relationship considering two major forest attributes: (i) species richness of non-native vascular plants and (ii) forest management. From 1101 forest plots in Europe, we gathered occurrences of 1212 vascular plant species, including 160 non-native species, and of 2404 beetle species, including 29 non-native species. We tested the relationship between the species richness of non-native beetles and plants using non-linear quantile regressions. We disentangled the effect of non-native plant species richness from that of management on the species richness of non-native beetles, while accounting for forest structural variables, using structural equation models. We found clear evidence of a hump-shaped relationship between non-native beetle and plant species richness. The general shape of the relationship persisted when considering only woody or non-woody plants, as well as only non-native plants. The relationship was also similar between managed and unmanaged forests. However, the proportion of non-native beetles in managed forests was higher than in unmanaged forests at the same plant species richness. Management had a direct negative effect on non-native beetle species richness, whereas non-native plant species richness had a direct positive effect. When considering all direct and indirect effects, management facilitated the occurrence of non-native beetles indirectly via non-native plants rather than directly. Synthesis and applications. Species richness of native and non-native vascular plants modulates the species richness of non-native beetles through relationships with opposite signs. The interplay with management regimes and forest structures determines whether non-native beetles are promoted. Forest management aimed at reducing the intensity of disturbance while encouraging native plant species richness could promote the dominance of dilution effects and biotic resistance and could moderate the establishment of non-native insects. © 2025 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Ecology © 2025 British Ecological Society.
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2025
Rivista
Journal of Applied Ecology
Dettagli
Vol. 62 (5) pp. 1243 - 1257
DOI
Towards an effective in-situ biodiversity assessment in European forests
Burrascano , Sabina , Chojnacki , Lucas , Balducci , Lorenzo , Chianucci , Francesco , Haeler , Elena , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Paillet , Yoan , de Andrade , Rafael Barreto , Boch , Steffen , de Smedt , Pallieter , Fischer , Markus , Mijangos , Itziar Garcia , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Kozák , Daniel , Kutszegi , Gergely , Lachat , Thibault , Mikoláš , Martin , Samu , Ferenc , Ravera , Sonia , Schall , Peter , Sitzia , Tommaso , Svoboda , Miroslav , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Ujházyová , Mariana , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Tinya , Flóra , Ódor , Péter
forest biodiversity vascular plants birds epiphytic bryophytes epiphytic lichens monitoring network multivariate standard error rarefaction curves saproxylic beetles wood-inhabiting fungi
Mostra abstract
Assessing multi-taxon biodiversity is crucial to understand forests’ response to environmental changes and to inform management strategies. In Europe, forest biodiversity monitoring is still scattered and heterogeneous, although a long-term monitoring network has long been advocated. Given the monitoring aims reported in various EU policies, this network should be accurately designed also through the estimation of its sampling effort, here intended as the number of sampling plots and sites. We used a novel database of forest multi-taxon biodiversity for a pilot study to: estimate the minimum sampling effort needed to: assess variation in species richness and composition; compare these estimates with the efforts invested in the pilot database; discuss estimates’ differences across taxonomic groups and forest categories. We focused on six taxonomic groups (vascular plants, birds, epiphytic lichens and bryophytes, wood-inhabiting fungi and saproxylic beetles) across six forest categories. Based on 6,165 plots at 2,084 different locations across Europe, we benchmarked the effort to achieve: a complete species richness estimate through interpolation/extrapolation curves, and a precise evaluation of species composition variation through multivariate standard error. Our estimates differed widely, especially among taxonomic groups. For species richness, estimates range from 3 to 147 plots per site across 3 to 29 sites per forest category, with birds and epiphytic bryophytes requiring the least effort. For species composition, estimates range from 5 to over 25 plots per site across 5 to 20 sites per forest category, with saproxylic beetles, vascular plants, and fungi displaying the highest estimates. The taxonomic groups requiring an effort comparable to existing data were the least diverse, all the others need greater efforts, either for species richness (e.g., saproxylic beetles), or species composition (e.g., vascular plants), or both (e.g., wood-inhabiting fungi). An effective monitoring network of European forests’ biodiversity should thoroughly account for these benchmarks and for their taxon-dependency. © 2025
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2025
Rivista
Basic and Applied Ecology
Dettagli
Vol. 84 pp. 121 - 132
DOI
One to rule them all? Assessing the performance of sustainable forest management indicators against multitaxonomic data for biodiversity conservation
Paillet , Yoan , Zapponi , Livia , Schall , Peter , Monnet , Jean Matthieu , Ammer , Christian , Balducci , Lorenzo , Boch , Steffen , Brazaitis , Gediminas , Campanaro , Alessandro , Chianucci , Francesco , Doerfler , Inken , Fischer , Markus , Gosselin , Marion , Goßner , Martin M. , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Jung , Kirsten G. , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Ódor , Péter , Tinya , Flóra , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Vacchiano , Giorgio , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Weisser , Wolfgang W. , Wohlwend , Michael Rudolf , Burrascano , Sabina
forest structure sustainable forest management multi-taxa diversity taxonomic indicators
Mostra abstract
Several regional initiatives and reporting efforts assess the state of forest biodiversity through broad-scale indicators based on data from national forest inventories. Although valuable, these indicators are essentially indirect and evaluate habitat quantity and quality rather than biodiversity per se. Therefore, their link to biodiversity may be weak, which decreases their usefulness for decision-making. For several decades, Forest Europe indicators assessed the state of European forests, in particular their biodiversity. However, no extensive study has been conducted to date to assess their performance – i.e. the capacity of the indicators to reflect variations in biodiversity – against multitaxonomic data. We hypothesized that no single biodiversity indicator from Forest Europe can represent overall forest biodiversity, but that several indicators would reflect habitat quality for at least some taxa in a comprehensive way. We tested the set of Forest Europe's indicators against the species richness of six taxonomic and functional groups across several hundreds of sampling units over Europe. We showed that, while some indicators perform relatively well across groups (e.g. deadwood volume), no single indicator represented all biodiversity at once, and that a combination of several indicators performed better. Forest Europe indicators were chosen for their availability and ease of understanding for most people. However, we showed that gaps in the monitoring framework persist, and that surveying certain taxa along with stand structure is necessary to support policymaking and tackle forest biodiversity loss at the large scale. Adding context (e.g. forest type) may also contribute to increase the performance of biodiversity indicators. © 2024 Elsevier Ltd
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2024
Rivista
Biological Conservation
Dettagli
Vol. 300
DOI
Silvicultural regime shapes understory functional structure in European forests
Chianucci , Francesco , Napoleone , Francesca , Ricotta , Carlo , Ferrara , Carlotta , Fusaro , Lina , Balducci , Lorenzo , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Bradley , Owen , Kovács , Bence , Mina , Marco , Cerabolini , Bruno Enrico Leone , Vandekerkhove , Kris , de Smedt , Pallieter , Lens , Luc , Hertzog , Lionel R. , Verheyen , Kris , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Matula , Radim , Doerfler , Inken , Müller , Jörg C. C. , Weisser , Wolfgang W. , Helback , Jan , Schall , Peter , Fischer , Markus , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Riis-Hansen , Rasmus , Goldberg , Irina , Aude , Erik , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Kappel Schmidt , Inger , Riis-Nielsen , Torben , Mårell , Anders , Dumas , Yann , Janssen , Philippe , Paillet , Yoan , Archaux , Frédéric , Xystrakis , Fotios , Tinya , Flóra , Ódor , Péter , Aszalós , Réka , Bölöni , János , Cutini , Andrea , Bagella , Simonetta , Sitzia , Tommaso , Brazaitis , Gediminas , Marozas , Vitas , Ujházyová , Mariana , Ujházy , Karol , Máliš , František , Nordén , Björn , Burrascano , Sabina
functional diversity functional redundancy forest understory sustainable forest management unmanaged forests ecosystem resilience silvicultural regime
Mostra abstract
Managing forests to sustain their diversity and functioning is a major challenge in a changing world. Despite the key role of understory vegetation in driving forest biodiversity, regeneration and functioning, few studies address the functional dimensions of understory vegetation response to silvicultural management. We assessed the influence of the silvicultural regimes on the functional diversity and redundancy of European forest understory. We gathered vascular plant abundance data from more than 2000 plots in European forests, each associated with one out of the five most widespread silvicultural regimes. We used generalized linear mixed models to assess the effect of different silvicultural regimes on understory functional diversity (Rao's quadratic entropy) and functional redundancy, while accounting for climate and soil conditions, and explored the reciprocal relationship between three diversity components (functional diversity, redundancy and dominance) across silvicultural regimes through a ternary diversity diagram. Intensive silvicultural regimes are associated with a decrease in functional diversity and an increase in functional redundancy, compared with unmanaged conditions. This means that although intensive management may buffer communities' functions against species or functional losses, it also limits the range of understory response to environmental changes. Policy implications. Different silvicultural regimes influence different facets of understory functional features. While unmanaged forests can be used as a reference to design silvicultural practices in compliance with biodiversity conservation targets, different silvicultural options should be balanced at landscape scale to sustain the multiple forest functions that human societies are increasingly demanding. © 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2024
Rivista
Journal of Applied Ecology
Dettagli
Vol. 61 (10) pp. 2350 - 2364
DOI
Words apart: Standardizing forestry terms and definitions across European biodiversity studies
Trentanovi , Giovanni , Campagnaro , Thomas , Sitzia , Tommaso , Chianucci , Francesco , Vacchiano , Giorgio , Ammer , Christian , Ciach , Michał , Nagel , Thomas A. , del Río , Miren , Paillet , Yoan , Munzi , Silvana , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Bravo-Oviedo , Andrés , Cutini , Andrea , D'Andrea , Ettore , de Smedt , Pallieter , Doerfler , Inken , Fotakis , Dimitrios G. , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Janssen , Philippe , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Korboulewsky , Nathalie , Kovács , Bence , Kozák , Daniel , Lachat , Thibault , Mårell , Anders , Matula , Radim , Mikoláš , Martin , Nordén , Björn , Ódor , Péter , Perović , Marko , Pötzelsberger , Elisabeth , Schall , Peter , Svoboda , Miroslav , Tinya , Flóra , Ujházyová , Mariana , Burrascano , Sabina
forest management silviculture multi-taxon data harmonization terminology
Mostra abstract
Forest biodiversity studies conducted across Europe use a multitude of forestry terms, often inconsistently. This hinders the comparability across studies and makes the assessment of the impacts of forest management on biodiversity highly context-dependent. Recent attempts to standardize forestry and stand description terminology mostly used a top-down approach that did not account for the perspectives and approaches of forest biodiversity experts. This work aims to establish common standards for silvicultural and vegetation definitions, creating a shared conceptual framework for a consistent study on the effects of forest management on biodiversity. We have identified both strengths and weaknesses of the silvicultural and vegetation information provided in forest biodiversity studies. While quantitative data on forest biomass and dominant tree species are frequently included, information on silvicultural activities and vegetation composition is often lacking, shallow, or based on broad and heterogeneous classifications. We discuss the existing classifications and their use in European forest biodiversity studies through a novel bottom-up and top-driven review process, and ultimately propose a common framework. This will enhance the comparability of forest biodiversity studies in Europe, and puts the basis for effective implementation and monitoring of sustainable forest management policies. The standards here proposed are potentially adaptable and applicable to other geographical areas and could be extended to other forest interventions. © 2023 The Authors
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2023
Rivista
Forest Ecosystems
Dettagli
Vol. 10
DOI
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
biodiversity forest stand structure multi-taxon field methods indicators sampling protocol
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
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2021
Rivista
Ecological Indicators
Dettagli
Vol. 132
DOI