No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The management of ecosystems is a 'wicked' problem (DeFries & Nagendra, 2017). The question of how to simultaneously combat biodiversity loss and maintain ecosystem functioning while improving human welfare remains open. 'Multifunctional landscapes' have evolved as a key concept for addressing multiple goals in the selection of land-cover alternatives (Sayer et al., 2013). These goals can be quantified as ecosystem services (Manning et al., 2018), or more generally, as indicators. These may also include non-use ecosystem functions and biodiversity indicators, as well as social preferences

Even though the site index is a popular method for describing forest productivity, its use is limited in uneven-aged multispecies forests. Accordingly, the site form (SF) is an alternative measure of productivity to the site index based on the tree height–diameter relationship. Our study aims to evaluate SF as a measure of productivity in the temperate uneven-aged multispecies forests of Durango, Mexico, applying three methods to estimate SF: (i) as the mean height of dominant trees at a reference diameter (SFH-D); (ii) as the expected mean height of dominant trees at a reference mean diameter (SFMH-MD), and (iii) as the expected height at a reference diameter for a given site (SFh-dbh). We assess the effectiveness of the SF based on two hypotheses: (i) the SF correlates to the total volume production, and (ii) the SF is independent of stand density. The SFH-D and the SFh-dbh showed a high correlation with productivity. However, they also did so with density. Contrary to this, the SFMH-MD had a weak correlation with density and productivity. We conclude that the SF is a suitable approach to describe site quality. Nonetheless, its effectiveness as a site quality indicator may be affected according to the method used.