Tree species richness, tree identity and non-native tree proportion affect arboreal spider diversity, abundance and biomass

Matevski, Dragan; Schuldt, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118775

Cited by 20 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, dilution of structural diversity by the introduction of structure‐poor conifers in mixtures, as discussed above, could play a role as well. Interestingly, deviating results have been observed for other taxa at the local plot level—especially forest floor‐associated arthropods, for which direct effects of tree identity can differ from those at higher forest strata (Ulyshen, 2011)—with sometimes weak or even positive effects of Douglas fir on overall species richness (Kriegel et al, 2021; Matevski & Schuldt, 2021; Schuldt & Scherer‐Lorenzen, 2014). In contrast to forest floor‐associated taxa, birds use habitats and resources across strata and up into the canopy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tree mixtures mediate negative effects of introduced tree species on bird taxonomic and functional diversity

Schuldt

Huke

Glatthorn

et al. 2022

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Recent biodiversity loss has emphasized the necessity to critically evaluate the consequences of human alterations of forest ecosystems. Stand diversification via tree species mixtures and the use of non-native trees are two such alterations currently gaining importance as climate change adaptations. However, the effects of local versus regional tree mixing on associated biodiversity and notably the modifying role of tree species growing outside their natural range remain poorly understood.2. We assessed how monocultures and mixtures of native and introduced tree species influence the taxonomic and functional diversity of bird communities at stand and landscape scales in north-west Germany. We focused on the dominant natural tree species (Fagus sylvatica) and economically important conifer species planted outside their natural range (the native Picea abies and non-native Pseudotsuga menziesii).3. We found that bird species richness and functional diversity were generally higher in pure and mixed stands of native F. sylvatica than in pure conifer stands, especially in comparison to non-native P. menziesii. These differences were particularly strong at the landscape scale. Pure conifer stands harboured only a reduced set of functionally similar bird species. Structural diversity based on tree microhabitat availability emerged as a key predictor of bird diversity. Synthesis and applications.Our study suggests that tree species mixtures do not necessarily increase bird diversity compared to pure stands of native trees, but can promote bird diversity relative to pure stands of species planted outside their natural range. Moreover, local mixtures, rather than a mosaic of pure stands, may promote bird diversity also at the landscape scale. By contrast, pure stands of tree species planted outside their natural range can increase biotic homogenization of forest birds. Promoting structural diversity of microhabitats via tree retention and ensuring that non-native trees are planted in mixtures

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While these questions have recently received increased attention in the study of other taxa (e.g. Kriegel et al, 2021; Matevski & Schuldt, 2021), knowledge of Douglas fir effects on birds in Central Europe is limited (Wohlgemuth et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tree mixtures mediate negative effects of introduced tree species on bird taxonomic and functional diversity

Schuldt

Huke

Glatthorn

et al. 2022

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such non-native tree species are often characterized by an impoverished associated biodiversity (Kennedy and Southwood 1984) and their increasing use in many regions has spurred a wealth of studies investigating their impact on native biodiversity (e.g. Finch and Szumelda 2007;Irwin et al 2014;Schuldt and Scherer-Lorenzen 2014;Oxbrough et al 2016;Matevski and Schuldt 2020). These studies often revealed locally negative effects of non-native tree species on the abundance, composition and species richness of forest biota (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monoculture and mixture-planting of non-native Douglas fir alters species composition, but promotes the diversity of ground beetles in a temperate forest system

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planting non-native tree species, like Douglas fir in temperate European forest systems, is encouraged to mitigate effects of climate change. However, Douglas fir monocultures often revealed negative effects on forest biota, while effects of mixtures with native tree species on forest ecosystems are less well understood. We investigated effects of three tree species (Douglas fir, Norway spruce, native European beech), on ground beetles in temperate forests of Germany. Beetles were sampled in monocultures of each tree species and broadleaf-conifer mixtures with pitfall traps, and environmental variables were assessed around each trap. We used linear mixed models in a two-step procedure to disentangle effects of environment and tree species identity on ground beetle abundance, species richness, functional diversity and species assemblage structure. Contradictory to our expectations, ground beetle abundance and functional diversity was highest in pure Douglas fir stands, while tree mixtures showed intermediate values between pure coniferous and pure beech stands. The main drivers of these patterns were only partially dependent on tree species identity, which highlights the importance of structural features in forest stands. However, our study revealed distinct shifts in assemblage structure between pure beech and pure Douglas fir stands, which were only partially eased through mixture planting. Our findings suggest that effects of planting non-native trees on associated biodiversity can be actively modified by promoting beneficial forest structures. Nevertheless, integrating non-native tree species, even in mixtures with native trees, will invariably alter assemblage structures of associated biota, which can compromise conservation efforts targeted at typical species composition.

show abstract

“…Several studies reported higher diversities in Douglas‐fir stands than in Norway spruce (Buée et al, 2011; Goßner et al, 2005; Gossner et al, 2016). However, other studies did not find differences between Norway spruce and Douglas‐fir (Ampoorter et al, 2015; Bertheau et al, 2009; Matevski & Schuldt, 2021). Some studies report differing diversities of arthropod and fungal communities in different situations, for example, depending on canopy stratum or point in time (Goßner & Ammer, 2006; Kubartová et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Forest associates may have lower diversity in forest stands that are dominated by non‐native tree species in comparison to stands of native tree species (Oxbrough et al, 2016). Similarly, native tree species that are cultivated in stands outside their natural range (such as Norway spruce in most regions of Central Europe) may host species communities that are less abundant or diverse in comparison to locally adapted native species (Horák et al, 2019; Matevski & Schuldt, 2021). Reasons for this may be that some native forest associates are host specific, or that certain structural or functional characteristics of non‐native tree species are unsuitable for some native species (Hunter, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Species diversity of forest floor biota in non‐native Douglas‐fir stands is similar to that of native stands

Glatthorn,

Appleby,

Balkenhol

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultivation of non‐native tree species is a promising option to adapt managed forests to climate change. However, consequences of non‐native tree species on flora, fauna, and microorganisms that occur in forest ecosystems (forest associates) need to be considered when managing forests. We lack a solid understanding of how cultivating non‐native tree species in pure stands and in mixture with native tree species impacts abundance and species diversity of forest associates. We compared abundance, alpha‐, beta‐ and gamma‐diversity of eight forest‐floor‐associated taxa that are relevant for ecosystem functioning (including fungi, plants, arthropods, and small mammals) between different forest ecosystems. We addressed pure stands of non‐native coniferous Douglas‐fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and two native species, broad‐leaved European beech (Fagus sylvatica) and coniferous Norway spruce (Picea abies), as well as mixed stands of European beech with each conifer in two regions with differing site conditions in temperate Northwest Germany. Diversity indices revealed differences among species groups. Gamma‐diversity and alpha‐diversity of forest associates in Douglas‐fir and spruce stands were usually higher than in beech stands. Estimates of species diversity of mixed stands are intermediate between estimates for the respective pure stands. Differences in the diversity between the two study regions were highly taxon specific with no clear support for a general trend toward a higher or lower species diversity of forest associates depending on site quality. Abundance values show a pattern similar to our diversity estimates, but with a higher statistical uncertainty. Non‐native Douglas‐fir stands provided habitats to support associated species communities of equally high or higher diversity than stands of native beech or spruce. Mixed stands of non‐native and native tree species may be a management option to achieve different goals, that is, to provide habitats for species that are strictly associated with beech and to increase resilience to climate change. However, the overall diversity of forest‐floor‐associated biota is not improved by cultivating Douglas‐fir or spruce in mixture with beech.

show abstract

Tree species richness, tree identity and non-native tree proportion affect arboreal spider diversity, abundance and biomass

Cited by 20 publications

References 45 publications

Tree mixtures mediate negative effects of introduced tree species on bird taxonomic and functional diversity

Tree mixtures mediate negative effects of introduced tree species on bird taxonomic and functional diversity

Monoculture and mixture-planting of non-native Douglas fir alters species composition, but promotes the diversity of ground beetles in a temperate forest system

Species diversity of forest floor biota in non‐native Douglas‐fir stands is similar to that of native stands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About