Pubblicazioni Scientifiche

Filtri di ricerca 7 risultati
Reset
Pubblicazioni per anno
Sustainable forest planning: Assessing biodiversity effects of Triad zoning based on empirical data and virtual landscapes
Duflot , Rémi , Heinrichs , Steffi , Balducci , Lorenzo , Chianucci , Francesco , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Paillet , Yoan , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Archaux , Frédéric , Boch , Steffen , Bouget , Christophe , Dvořák , Daniel , Fischer , Markus , Gosselin , Frédéric , Gosselin , Marion , Goßner , Martin M. , Holá , Eva , Hošek , Jan , Jung , Kirsten G. , Palice , Zdeněk , Renner , Swen C. , Weisser , Wolfgang W. , Nagel , Thomas A. , Burrascano , Sabina , Schall , Peter
forest management forestry biodiversity conservation gamma diversity landscape planning
Mostra abstract
The Triad framework seeks to balance the economic and ecological functions in forested landscapes by combining intensively, extensively, and unmanaged areas, assuming a higher support to biodiversity in extensively rather than in intensively managed forests. We quantified the effects of Triad zoning on biodiversity in (sub)montane eutrophic European beech forests. Using a European-wide multitaxon database and a “virtual” landscape approach (i.e., by resampling empirical data), we evaluated how the proportion of Triad management categories affected the landscape-level species diversity of birds, saproxylic beetles, vascular plants, epiphytic bryophytes, lichens, and wood-inhabiting fungi, as well as multitaxonomic diversity. The results varied greatly among taxonomic groups. Multitaxonomic diversity peaked in landscapes composed of 60% unmanaged and 40% intensively managed forests. While intensive management can benefit some taxa through the creation of open habitats, unmanaged forests are the backbone of biodiversity conservation, underlining the need to safeguard the remaining old-growth forests under natural dynamics, and to extend the current area of unmanaged forests in Europe. Extensive forest management, however, did not contribute to biodiversity conservation as expected. As withdrawing such a high proportion of European forest landscapes from management is unfeasible given the increasing demand for timber, efforts are needed to increase the presence of structural features supporting biodiversity into extensively managed forests. © © 2025 the Author(s).
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2025
Rivista
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Dettagli
Vol. 122 (39)
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
Where are we now with European forest multi-taxon biodiversity and where can we head to?
Burrascano , Sabina , Chianucci , Francesco , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Sitzia , Tommaso , Tinya , Flóra , Doerfler , Inken , Paillet , Yoan , Nagel , Thomas A. , Mitić , Božena , Morillas , Lourdes , Munzi , Silvana , Van Der Sluis , Theo , Alterio , Edoardo , Balducci , Lorenzo , de Andrade , Rafael Barreto , Bouget , Christophe , Giordani , P. , Lachat , Thibault , Matošević , Dinka , Napoleone , Francesca , Nascimbene , Juri , Paniccia , Chiara , Roth , Nicolas , Aszalós , Réka , Brazaitis , Gediminas , Cutini , Andrea , D'Andrea , Ettore , de Smedt , Pallieter , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Janssen , Philippe , Kozák , Daniel , Mårell , Anders , Mikoláš , Martin , Nordén , Björn , Matula , Radim , Schall , Peter , Svoboda , Miroslav , Ujházyová , Mariana , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Wohlwend , Michael Rudolf , Xystrakis , Fotios , Aleffi , Michele , Ammer , Christian , Archaux , Frédéric , Asbeck , Thomas , N Avtzis , Dimitrios N. , Ayasse , Manfred , Bagella , Simonetta , Balestrieri , Rosario , Barbati , Anna , Basile , Marco , Bergamini , Ariel , Bertini , Giada , Biscaccianti , Alessandro Bruno , Boch , Steffen , Bölöni , János , Bombi , Pierluigi , Boscardin , Yves , Brunialti , Giorgio , Bruun , Hans Henrik , Buscot , François , Byriel , David Bille , Campagnaro , Thomas , Campanaro , Alessandro , Chauvat , Matthieu , Ciach , Michał , Čiliak , Marek , Cistrone , Luca , Pereira , Joaò Manuel Cordeiro , Daniel , Rolf , de Cinti , Bruno , de Filippo , Gabriele , Dekoninck , Wouter , Di Salvatore , Umberto , Dumas , Yann , Elek , Zoltán , Ferretti , Fabrizio , Fotakis , Dimitrios G. , Frank , Tamás , Frey , Julian , Giancola , Carmen , Gömöryová , Erika , Gosselin , Marion , Gosselin , Frédéric , Goßner , Martin M. , Götmark , Frank , Haeler , Elena , Hansen , Aslak Kappel , Hertzog , Lionel R. , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Johannsen , Vivian Kvist , Justensen , Mathias Just , Korboulewsky , Nathalie , Kovács , Bence , Lakatos , Ferenc , Landivar , Carlos Miguel , Lens , Luc , Lingua , Emanuele
forest biodiversity biodiversity conservation forest stand structure multi-taxon sustainable management
Mostra abstract
The European biodiversity and forest strategies rely on forest sustainable management (SFM) to conserve forest biodiversity. However, current sustainability assessments hardly account for direct biodiversity indicators. We focused on forest multi-taxon biodiversity to: i) gather and map the existing information; ii) identify knowledge and research gaps; iii) discuss its research potential. We established a research network to fit data on species, standing trees, lying deadwood and sampling unit description from 34 local datasets across 3591 sampling units. A total of 8724 species were represented, with the share of common and rare species varying across taxonomic classes: some included many species with several rare ones (e.g., Insecta); others (e.g., Bryopsida) were represented by few common species. Tree-related structural attributes were sampled in a subset of sampling units (2889; 2356; 2309 and 1388 respectively for diameter, height, deadwood and microhabitats). Overall, multi-taxon studies are biased towards mature forests and may underrepresent the species related to other developmental phases. European forest compositional categories were all represented, but beech forests were over-represented as compared to thermophilous and boreal forests. Most sampling units (94%) were referred to a habitat type of conservation concern. Existing information may support European conservation and SFM strategies in: (i) methodological harmonization and coordinated monitoring; (ii) definition and testing of SFM indicators and thresholds; (iii) data-driven assessment of the effects of environmental and management drivers on multi-taxon forest biological and functional diversity, (iv) multi-scale forest monitoring integrating in-situ and remotely sensed information. © 2023 The Authors
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2023
Rivista
Biological Conservation
Dettagli
Vol. 284
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