Abstract

Urban forests are usually not intensively managed and may provide suitable environments for species threatened by production forestry. Thus, urban forests could have the potential of enhancing biodiversity both within cities and at a larger landscape scale. In this study, we investigated stand structures of boreal urban forests to assess them in terms of naturalness and biodiversity conservation potential. We sampled two types of urban spruce-dominated stands: random urban stands as representatives of average urban forests, and valuable urban stands known to host high polypore richness and assumed to represent urban biodiversity hotspots. Urban forests were compared to rural forests with different levels of naturalness. Living and dead trees and cut stumps were measured from all studied stands. Urban forests had generally diverse living tree structures with abundant large-diameter trees. Random urban forests had more dead wood (median 10.1 m3 ha−1) than production forests (2.7 m3 ha−1) but still considerably less than protected, former production forests (53.9 m3 ha−1) or semi-natural forests (115.6 m3 ha−1). On the other hand, valuable urban forests had relatively high median volume of dead wood (88.2 m3 ha−1). We conclude that the combination of diverse stand composition and the presence of old-growth characteristics in boreal urban forests form a strong baseline from which their biodiversity value can be further developed, e.g. by leaving more fallen or cut trees to form dead wood. We propose that urban forests could become significant habitats for biodiversity conservation in the future.

Highlights

  • Direct and indirect effects of urbanization extend beyond the city core, potentially affecting substantial areas of forested land (Loeb, 2011)

  • Five different forest categories were included in the study: (1) randomly selected urban forests, (2) valuable urban forests, (3) randomly selected production forests, (4) valuable production forests and (5) semi-natural forests (Fig. 1, Table 1)

  • Other common tree species occurring in at least half of the random and valuable urban sample plots were rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), pine (Pinus sylvestris), aspen (Populus tremula) and goat willow (Salix caprea)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Direct and indirect effects of urbanization extend beyond the city core, potentially affecting substantial areas of forested land (Loeb, 2011). The characteristics of urban forests compared to production and natural forests, and their potential in protecting biodiversity are poorly understood. Poland & McCullough, 2006) These effects are generally considered harmful to indigenous nature, and urban forests are often perceived as degraded habitats. People tend to prefer urban forest stands with old trees, moderate tree species diversity and canopy stratification, and managed undergrowth that permits good visual penetration (Gundersen & Frivold, 2008; Edwards et al, 2012a, 2012b). Negative attitudes towards dead wood have been reported especially in the Nordic region (Gundersen & Frivold, 2008; Edwards et al, 2012b), but public acceptance of dead wood can be increased by education and increased awareness of their ecological benefits (Gundersen, Stange, Kaltenborn, & Vistad, 2017)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call