| Literature DB >> 23638378 |
David A Orwig1, Audrey A Barker Plotkin, Eric A Davidson, Heidi Lux, Kathleen E Savage, Aaron M Ellison.
Abstract
Loss of foundation tree species rapidly alters ecological processes in forested ecosystems. Tsuga canadensis, an hypothesized foundation species ofEntities:
Keywords: Adelges tsugae; Eastern hemlock; Forest dynamics; Hemlock woolly adelgid; Logging; Nutrient cycling; Primary productivity; Soil respiration; Tsuga canadensis
Year: 2013 PMID: 23638378 PMCID: PMC3629072 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.41
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Location of the Harvard Forest Hemlock Removal Experiment.
Location of the Harvard Forest Hemlock Removal Experiment in Massachusetts, USA. The regional map shows the basal area of eastern hemlock at a 1 km2 resolution. The inset shows the location of the experimental blocks and treatments. Plots 1, 2, 3, and 8 make up the valley block; plots 4–7 make up the ridge block. Each canopy manipulation treatment – hemlock control (He), girdled (G), logged (L), and hardwood control (Hw) – was applied to a 90 × 90 m plot within each block.
Changes in total average basal area (m2 ha−1) and density (ha−1) in the treatment plots of the Harvard Forest Hemlock Removal Experiment.
| Basal area | Stem density | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 45.6 | 52.1 | 940 | 678 |
|
| 47.3 | 54.0 | 842 | 637 | |
|
|
| 50.3 | 53.0 | 1354 | 1011 |
|
| 15.9 | 17.6 | 395 | 331 | |
|
|
| 47.9 | 49.5 | 1212 | 1089 |
|
| 15.4 | 13.8 | 469 | 373 | |
|
|
| 29.7 | 35.6 | 1122 | 885 |
|
| 31.0 | 37.7 | 990 | 807 | |
Figure 2Temporal changes in vegetation structure following hemlock removal.
Temporal trajectories of vegetation structural characteristics in the Harvard Forest Hemlock Removal Experiment. Values shown are plot means and standard deviations (where multiple samples were taken in each plot), back-transformed as necessary. Solid lines and symbols are plots in the valley; dashed lines and open symbols are plots on the ridge. Colors indicate treatments: blue – hemlock controls; yellow – all hemlocks girdled; red – hemlocks logged; lavender – hardwood controls.
Summary of ANCOVA analyses on vegetation structural characteristics shown in Fig. 2. The models fit were all of the form response variable = β0 + β1 × block + β2 × time + β3 × treatment + β4 × time × treatment; if the response variable was ln-transformed prior to analysis, that is noted in the column heading. Values shown in the first four rows are F-statistics, associated degrees of freedom, and P-values; parameter estimates (SE) for the four treatments – C (hemlock control); G (girdled), L (logged), and H (hardwood control) – are given in the next three rows. Parameter estimates are not back-transformed (for models fit to ln-transformed data). Parameter estimates that are significantly different from 0 are shown in italics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
|
| |||||||
|
| 0.78 (1.62) |
| − |
|
|
| |
| 0.06 (0.58) | 0.15 (0.62) | 0.18(0.12) |
| 0.02 (0.39) | 0.08 (0.13) | 2.89 (2.56) | |
| G: 0.44 (2.22) | G: 0.49 (2.19) | G: 0.17 (0.42) | G: 0.15 (0.42) | G: 0.55 (1.67) | G: −0.29 (0.55) | G: −2.08 (10.81) | |
| L: −2.12 (2.22) | L: 0.32 (2.19) | L: 0.21 (0.42) |
| L: 0.05 (0.55) |
| ||
|
| H: 23.71 (2.19) |
| H: 3.50 (0.42) | L: 1.71 (1.67) | H: −0.37 (0.55) | H: 18.51 (10.81) | |
| H: 1.94 (1.67) | |||||||
|
| G: 0.38 (0.88) |
|
| G: 0.08 (0.56) |
| G: −1.82 (3.62) | |
|
|
| L: −0.05 (0.17) | L: 0.7 (0.17) | L: −0.10 (0.18) | L: −4.28 (3.62) | ||
| H: 0.68 (0.82) | H: 0.23 (0.88) | H: −0.22(0.17) | H: −0.14 (0.17) | L: 0.61 (0.56) | H: 0.04 (0.18) | H: −5.40 (3.62) | |
| H: 0.11 (0.56) |
Figure 3Temporal changes in ecosystem dynamics following hemlock removal.
Temporal trajectories of ecosystem functional characteristics in the Harvard Forest Hemlock Removal Experiment. Values shown are plot means and standard deviations (where multiple samples were taken in each plot), back-transformed as necessary. Solid lines and symbols are plots in the valley; dashed lines and open symbols are plots on the ridge. Colors indicate treatments: blue – hemlock controls; yellow – all hemlocks girdled; red – hemlocks logged; lavender – hardwood controls.
Summary of ANCOVA analyses on ecosystem functional characteristics shown in Fig. 3. The models fit were all of the form response variable = β0 + β1 × block + β2 × time + β3 × treatment + β4 × time × treatment; if the response variable was ln-transformed prior to analysis, that is noted in the column heading. Values shown in the first four rows are F-statistics, associated degrees of freedom, and P-values; parameter estimates (SE) for the four treatments – C (hemlock control); G (girdled), L (logged), and H (hardwood control) – are given in the next three rows. Parameter estimates are not back-transformed (for models fit to ln-transformed data). Parameter estimates that are significantly different from 0 are shown in italics.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
| 62.80 (37.73) |
| |
| 0.00 (0.06) | 0.00 (0.33) | 0.01 (0.01) | −0.20 (0.10) | −9.77 (11.64) |
| |
| G: 0.36 (0.27) | G: 2.43 (1.50) | G: −0.02 (0.03) | G: 0.46 (0.35) | G: 15.95 (41.15) | G: −0.05 (0.20) | |
|
| L: −2.53 (1.50) | L: 0.0 (0.3) |
| L: 59.44 (41.15) | L: 0.23 (0.20) | |
| H: 0.00 (0.27) | H: −2.37 (1.50) | H: −0.16 (0.35) | H: −17.85 (41.15) | H: −0.09 (0.20) | ||
|
|
| G: 0.02 (0.01) |
| G: 25.44 (16.46) |
| |
| L: 0.12 (0.09) | L: 0.10 (0.47) | L: 0.01 (0.01) | L: 0.11 (0.14) | L: 4.49 (16.46) | L: 0.05 (0.08) | |
| H: 0.01 (0.09) | H: −0.22 (0.47) | H: 0.04 (0.14) | H: 8.92 (16.46) | H: 0.05 (0.08) |