| Literature DB >> 20949062 |
Mats Dynesius1, Heloise Gibb, Joakim Hjältén.
Abstract
Many species use coarse woody debris (CWD) and are disadvantaged by the forestry-induced loss of this resource. A neglected process affecting CWD is the covering of the surfaces of downed logs caused by sinking into the ground (increasing soil contact, mostly covering the underside of the log), and dense overgrowth by ground vegetation. Such cover is likely to profoundly influence the quality and accessibility of CWD for wood-inhabiting organisms, but the factors affecting covering are largely unknown. In a five-year experiment we determined predictors of covering rate of fresh logs in boreal forests and clear-cuts. Logs with branches were little covered because they had low longitudinal ground contact. For branchless logs, longitudinal ground contact was most strongly related to estimated peat depth (positive relation). The strongest predictor for total cover of branchless logs was longitudinal ground contact. To evaluate the effect on cover of factors other than longitudinal ground contact, we separately analyzed data from only those log sections that were in contact with the ground. Four factors were prominent predictors of percentage cover of such log sections: estimated peat depth, canopy shade (both increasing cover), potential solar radiation calculated from slope and slope aspect, and diameter of the log (both reducing cover). Peat increased cover directly through its low resistance, which allowed logs to sink and soil contact to increase. High moisture and low temperatures in pole-ward facing slopes and under a canopy favor peat formation through lowered decomposition and enhanced growth of peat-forming mosses, which also proved to rapidly overgrow logs. We found that in some boreal forests, peat and fast-growing mosses can rapidly cover logs lying on the ground. When actively introducing CWD for conservation purposes, we recommend that such rapid covering is avoided, thereby most likely improving the CWD's longevity as habitat for many species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20949062 PMCID: PMC2951364 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Location of the 10 study areas in Scandinavia.
Each filled circle represents a study area that contains three sites (one old forest, one mature forest, and one clear-cut; right inset).
Diameter and local environments (predictors), and cover estimates (response variables) of the 921 logs used in the study.
| Mean | Median | Range | Explanations | |
|
| ||||
| Diameter of log (cm) | 19.9 | 19.7 | 8.43–43.3 | Mean of seven measurements per log |
| Altitude (m above sea level) | 367 | 370 | 85–510 | Taken from maps |
| PADIR (MJ cm−2 year−1) | 0.511 | 0.523 | 0.250–0.735 | Potential Annual Direct Incident Radiation, calculated from ground slope, slope aspect and latitude |
| Estimated soil moisture | 2.65 | 2.74 | 2.23–3.21 | Highest indicator value among plant taxa recorded <0.5 m from the log |
| Estimated peat depth (cm) | 23.6 | 13.7 | 4.6–70.7 | Highest indicator value among plant taxa recorded <0.5 m from the log |
| Canopy shade | 4.91 | 6 | 1–7 | Seven classes representing increasing shade from open clear-cut far from forest edges (1) to shaded position under a spruce tree in closed forest (7). |
|
| ||||
| Longitudinal ground contact (#) | 4.24 | 4 | 0–7 | Number out of 7 sampling points along the log that had direct ground contact. Estimate of the proportion of the length of the log that was in contact with the ground |
| Total cover (%) | 23.1 | 19.3 | 0–94.3 | Mean percentage of circumference covered (soil contact + ground vegetation cover), calculated from seven measurements per log, including those with zero cover. Estimate of the proportion of the entire log surface that was covered. |
| Cover of log sections in contact with the ground (%) | 36.1 | 34.0 | 2.2–95.9 | Mean percentage of circumference covered at only those sampling points where the log had ground contact (1–7 measurements per log), thereby controlling for the effect of longitudinal ground contact on cover. |
Level ground has PADIR = 0.522–0.529 MJ cm−2 year−1 within the latitude span of the sites.
Only the 897 logs with ground contact at one or more sampling points of measure are included.
Results from analyses of the effects of log properties and environmental conditions on longitudinal ground contact and our two measures of percentage cover by soil contact and ground vegetation, using 4-m branchless logs.
| Full GLM model | Best fit model | Independent contribution | Correlation coefficient (r) | |||
| F | p | F | p | (%) | ||
|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ||
| Estimated peat depth | 28.44 | <0.001 | 31.51 | <0.001 | 28.5 | 0.25 |
| Diameter | 9.88 | 0.002 | 9.71 | 0.002 | 15 | 0.11 |
| Log species | 9.42 | 0.003 | 8.91 | 0.003 | 13.7 | Birch > Spruce |
| Estimated soil moisture | 4.30 | 0.039 | 3.94 | 0.048 | 8.4 | 0.12 |
| PADIR | 1.46 | 0.230 | 1.34 | 0.249 | 9.8 | −0.11 |
| Altitude | 1.40 | 0.263 | 5.8 | −0.02 | ||
| Canopy shade | 0.00 | 0.967 | 18.8 | 0.11 | ||
|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ||
| Estimated peat depth | 23.70 | <0.001 | 23.70 | <0.001 | 9.5 | 0.26 |
| Diameter | 22.19 | <0.001 | 23.26 | <0.001 | 7.3 | −0.18 |
| Log species | 5.88 | 0.017 | 5.28 | 0.023 | 8.7 | Birch>Spruce |
| PADIR | 5.19 | 0.024 | 4.9 | 0.028 | 31.4 | −0.26 |
| Altitude | 1.28 | 0.283 | 3.3 | −0.09 | ||
| Estimated soil moisture | 0.29 | 0.593 | 0.22 | 0.636 | 9.1 | 0.22 |
| Canopy shade | 0.27 | 0.606 | 0.24 | 0.627 | 30.7 | 0.23 |
|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ||
| Longitudinal ground contact | 1510.61 | <0.001 | 1519.51 | <0.001 | 71.2 | 0.83 |
| Diameter | 25.88 | <0.001 | 27.15 | <0.001 | 2.3 | −0.03 |
| Estimated peat depth | 11.02 | 0.001 | 10.94 | 0.001 | 5 | 0.31 |
| PADIR | 6.61 | 0.011 | 6.65 | 0.011 | 6.3 | −0.23 |
| Log species | 5.22 | 0.024 | 4.91 | 0.029 | 2.3 | Birch > Spruce |
| Canopy shade | 1.80 | 0.182 | 1,74 | 0.189 | 6.9 | 0.22 |
| Altitude | 0.30 | 0.597 | 1.9 | −0.05 | ||
| Estimated soil moisture | 0.20 | 0.652 | 0.25 | 0.619 | 4.3 | 0.21 |
We used a set of 720 logs distributed over 122 experimental blocks in 30 sites. Results are from a full GLM model, a best fit model based on AICs, a hierarchical partitioning analysis (independent contribution), and a Pearson's correlation. The random factors “locality”, “site(locality)” and “block(site(locality))” were included in the full model and best model approaches, but do not show up in the table as a REML approach was used. Means from all logs within sites were used in the hierarchical partitioning analysis, because it cannot deal with random effects. Hence, this analysis only treats among-site (N = 30) variability in the response variables. The factors are sorted according to their F-value in the full model. Percentage data on cover were arcsine transformed before analysis. Longitudinal ground contact (0–7 points with contact) was not transformed. Degrees of freedom for predictors were 1 in all cases.
Chosen using the Akaike Information Criterion [40].
For tree species only qualitative relationships are presented, because this factor is binary and categorical.
10 logs did not have ground contact at any of the sampling points and could therefore not be used here.
Figure 2Frequency distribution of the experimental logs among classes of longitudinal ground contact and cover.
(A) Longitudinal ground contact expressed as the number out of seven evenly spaced sampling points along each log that were in direct contact with the ground (921 logs). (B) Percentage of the circumference of logs that was covered by soil contact and ground vegetation after five years on the ground. Black bars represent the frequency of logs based on the mean cover of all seven sampling points for a log (total cover, 921 logs). Grey bars are the frequency of logs based on the mean cover at only those sampling points along a log that had ground contact (897 logs because 24 logs were excluded since they did not have ground contact at any of the seven sampling points).
Figure 3Longitudinal ground contact and cover of logs with and without branches and tops.
(A) Longitudinal ground contact expressed as the number out of seven evenly spaced sampling points along each log, that were in direct contact with the ground. (B) Percentage cover by soil contact and ground vegetation for log sections in contact with the ground (mean of 1–7 measurements per log). (C) Percentage total cover of logs (mean of all 7 measurements per log). Results of the REML models are presented under the graphs. Black bars describe means and SE for long spruce logs with branches and tops (N = 37 in A and C, but only 24 in B because 13 logs did not have ground contact at any of the 7 sampling points) and open bars depict means and SE for all 4-m spruce logs without branches and tops from the same experimental blocks as the branched logs (N = 215 in A and C and 139 in B).
Figure 4Percentage cover of logs having no vegetation overgrowth or having different kinds of overgrowth.
“None” denotes the logs with no overgrowth. The logs having overgrowth are grouped according to the plant group(s) that dominated their overgrowth: vascular plants (mostly grasses and dwarf shrubs), Sphagnum and/or Polytrichum mosses (“SphPoly”; peat-forming mosses growing on moist ground), other mosses (species of less moist ground) and four groups with co-dominance by different combinations of these three types. Triangles denote mean percentage total cover (720 logs; summarizing all seven sampling points per log) and squares indicate mean percentage cover of log sections in contact with the ground (summarizing 1–7 sampling points per log depending on the degree of longitudinal ground contact; 710 logs since 10 logs did not have ground contact at any sampling points). Bars depict standard error. Results from REML model: p<0.001, F = 35.31, df = 7, 670.6 (total cover) and p<0.001, F = 29.30, df = 7, 666.7 (log sections in contact with the ground). Different letters indicate significant differences between groups (Tukey's test, α = 0.05).