![Uncommon bryophytes in Swedish forests-key habitats and production forests compared [An article from: Forest Ecology and Management]](https://www.ebooknetworking.net/books/B00/0RR/bigB000RR0XTO.jpg)
Uncommon bryophytes in Swedish forests-key habitats and production forests compared [An article from: Forest Ecology and Management]
Book Details
PublisherElsevier
ISBN / ASINB000RR0XTO
ISBN-13978B000RR0XT2
AvailabilityAvailable for download now
Sales Rank99,999,999
MarketplaceUnited States 🇺🇸
Description
This digital document is a journal article from Forest Ecology and Management, published by Elsevier in 2004. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Media Library immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Description:
An ongoing large-scale survey has revealed that there are 60-70000 'woodland key habitats' in Sweden, covering at least 1% of the productive forestland. According to definition they should contain red-listed species, but no inventories of these species have been made and instead the survey has been based on indirect criteria like natural forest characteristics and indicator species. We compared red-listed and indicator bryophytes between woodland key habitats (WKHs) and production forests (PFs) in two areas (500 and 600km^2) in south-east Sweden, using randomized sampling and with line-transect analysis. The number of records per hectare (one record=presence in a 10mx10m) of red-listed bryophytes in the WKHs was 0.4 and 4, and in the PFs 0.5 and 0.8, depending on area. In only one of the areas, did WKHs have significantly more records per hectare and a larger number of red-listed bryophyte species logha^-^1 than the PFs. The cumulative species richness for indicator species and red-listed species together was significantly higher in WKHs compared with PFs in both areas, to judge from the confidence bands of species accumulation curves. Positive correlations between red-listed species and indicator species regarding their number as well as their abundance in the WKHs support the use and selection of indicator species. Our results show that WKHs do not necessarily have a higher density of red-listed bryophyte species than PFs, especially when compared with mature PFs. A more complete picture would be achieved if different forest types and age classes were investigated separately, in a replicated design.
Description:
An ongoing large-scale survey has revealed that there are 60-70000 'woodland key habitats' in Sweden, covering at least 1% of the productive forestland. According to definition they should contain red-listed species, but no inventories of these species have been made and instead the survey has been based on indirect criteria like natural forest characteristics and indicator species. We compared red-listed and indicator bryophytes between woodland key habitats (WKHs) and production forests (PFs) in two areas (500 and 600km^2) in south-east Sweden, using randomized sampling and with line-transect analysis. The number of records per hectare (one record=presence in a 10mx10m) of red-listed bryophytes in the WKHs was 0.4 and 4, and in the PFs 0.5 and 0.8, depending on area. In only one of the areas, did WKHs have significantly more records per hectare and a larger number of red-listed bryophyte species logha^-^1 than the PFs. The cumulative species richness for indicator species and red-listed species together was significantly higher in WKHs compared with PFs in both areas, to judge from the confidence bands of species accumulation curves. Positive correlations between red-listed species and indicator species regarding their number as well as their abundance in the WKHs support the use and selection of indicator species. Our results show that WKHs do not necessarily have a higher density of red-listed bryophyte species than PFs, especially when compared with mature PFs. A more complete picture would be achieved if different forest types and age classes were investigated separately, in a replicated design.
