Utilization of Non-native Wood by Saproxylic Insects

Diversity and conservation of saproxylic beetles in 42 European tree species: an experimental approach using early successional stages of branches

“…Hence, our results are partially in line to those of other studies (Müller et al, 2015b;Ulyshen et al 2018), whereby the importance of non-native tree species is still under debate with mixed scientific evidence. In the studies of Müller et al (2015b) and Ulyshen et al (2018), the species diversity associated with P. menziesii was significantly lower than that determined from native coniferous trees. Although in the studies of Bertheau et al (2009) and Della Rocca et al (2016), which included P. menziesii and R. pseudoacacia, there were no differences in the species diversity of native versus non-native tree species.…”

“…Those tree species as well as A. grandis and Q. rubra were introduced into Central Europe from North America within the last 200 years (Schmid et al, 2014;San-Miguel-Ayanz et al, 2016), but adaption to novel tree species by saproxylic beetle specialists within this short time is unlikely (Goßner et al, 2009;Oleksa & Klejdysz, 2017). Generally, it is assumed that non-native tree species host more saproxylic beetle generalists than specialists (Ulyshen et al 2018). Nevertheless, the presence of native congeneric tree species increases this process of adaptation (Pearse & Hipp, 2009;Branco et al, 2015), which would explain our finding of the relatively high species numbers of red-listed species in A. grandis and Q. rubra and the absence of red-listed species in P. menziesii and R. pseudoacacia, which have no European relatives.…”

The use of sentinel logs to assess host shifts in early beetle colonisers of deadwood under climate‐ and forestry‐induced tree species substitutions

“…Contrasting colonisation of exotic substrates by insects and fungi has indeed already been demonstrated (Lombardero et al, 2012;Schmid et al, 2014;Ulyshen et al, 2018) and even observed in our context in a companion study comparing Douglas and silver fir (unpublished results). A thorough multi-taxon approach would help to determine whether non-native deadwood does indeed provide valuable habitats from a conservation perspective (Ulyshen et al, 2018). Deadwood monitoring should also encompass a large range of DDW diameters and positions (shaded vs sunny, ground-lying vs standing, etc.)…”

“…Given these contrasting responses for two crucial groups in the wood decomposition process, the overall decomposition of exotic DDW should be further investigated. A decomposition experiment by Ulyshen et al (2018) in the United Sates suggests that termites did not contribute as significantly to the decomposition of non-native wood species as they did for native wood species. Nonetheless, Fierro et al (2017) assert that the ecosystem services provided by saproxylic beetles are as functional in exotic pine plantations as in native forests.…”

“…These changes in native tree species' ranges due to both the influence of climate change and the forestry‐induced expansion of exotic tree species are likely to alter habitat conditions for forest biodiversity (Felton et al ., 2013), example through the tree species composition of dead wood available for saproxylic biodiversity (Ulyshen et al ., 2018). The composition of dead wood in terms of host tree species is a fundamental dimension of food suitability and resource availability for saproxylic taxa (e.g.…”